kanboard-mcp

create_column

Add a new column to a Kanboard project board. Specify a title and optionally set a WIP limit or description. Returns the new column's ID.

Instructions

Add a column to a Kanboard project board. Project resolved from explicit project_id/project_identifier or .kanboard.yaml. To reorder it use move_column, to rename or change its WIP limit use update_column, to remove it use delete_column. Returns { column_id } on success.

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": {
      "title": "<title>"
    },
    "name": "create_column"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`project_id`	No	Kanboard project id (overrides .kanboard.yaml).
`project_identifier`	No	Kanboard project identifier string (overrides .kanboard.yaml).
`title`	Yes	Column title (1–255 chars, required).
`task_limit`	No	WIP limit for the column (0 = unlimited).
`description`	No	Optional column description.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedMay 12, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. It mentions the return value { column_id } on success but does not disclose behavioral traits like idempotency or duplicate handling. Adequate but lacking depth.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then resolution, then related tools and return value. No wasted words, efficient and clear.

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?

Covers purpose, project resolution, return value, and sibling differentiation. Lacks details on error behavior or validation, but sufficient for a creation tool with good schema coverage.

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%, so baseline 3. Description adds minimal value beyond schema, only clarifying project resolution. No enrichment for other parameters.

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

Purpose5/5

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

Description clearly states 'Add a column to a Kanboard project board' with a specific verb and resource. It also mentions related tools (move_column, update_column, delete_column) to distinguish from siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explains project resolution from explicit IDs or config file, and lists alternative tools for reordering, renaming, and deleting. Could be improved by explicitly stating when not to use this tool.

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