trello-mcp

Get card

trello_get_card

Read-only

Retrieve full Trello card details—description, checklists with item IDs and states, members, labels, attachments, and comments—using a card ID, short link, or URL.

Instructions

Full card: description, checklists with item ids and states, members, labels, attachments and comments.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "cardId": "<cardId>"
    },
    "name": "trello_get_card"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`cardId`	Yes	Card id, short link, or the full card URL (https://trello.com/c/...)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 21, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful return-content context by listing the included sections (checklists, members, labels, attachments, comments), which is valuable because no output schema exists.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single short sentence front-loads 'Full card' and lists the relevant returned sections without filler. It is appropriately sized for a one-parameter getter.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple read tool with full parameter documentation and read-only annotations, the description gives enough return-field context to set expectations. The main omission is sibling selection guidance.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, and the sole cardId parameter already documents accepted forms including card id, short link, and full URL. The description adds no parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The title and name state 'Get card,' and the description enumerates the full card payload, making the resource and returned scope clear. It stops short of explicitly distinguishing this from siblings like trello_search_cards or trello_list_cards.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description does not say when to call this tool versus trello_list_cards or trello_search_cards. 'Full card' hints at detailed retrieval, but selection guidance is left entirely to inference.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server