Boarderless MCP Server

Export Board File (.bdrl.json)

export_board_file

Destructive

Saves the current Boarderless board as a .bdrl.json file in the workspace. Accepts an optional filename; defaults to an autosave name based on board ID.

Instructions

Atomically save the current canonical schema-v2 Boarderless board as a .bdrl.json file inside the configured workspace. Without filename, uses a stable board-name-and-id autosave filename.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "export_board_file"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`filename`	No	Optional single filename ending in .bdrl.json. Subdirectories and path traversal are rejected.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.28Jul 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. The description adds atomicity and workspace location details, which is useful but does not disclose overwrite behavior or error states.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The primary action is front-loaded, and the default filename behavior is efficiently stated.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, default behavior, and atomicity. It could mention success/failure indicators.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%. The description adds value by explaining the default behavior when no filename is provided, which goes beyond the schema's parameter description.

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 description clearly states the tool saves the current canonical schema-v2 Boarderless board as a .bdrl.json file in the configured workspace. It is specific but does not differentiate from the sibling 'export_board' tool.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'export_board' or 'import_board_file'. The description lacks context for optimal usage.

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

Deploy Server