kanboard-mcp

move_column

Reorder a column on a Kanboard board by specifying its ID and the new 1-based position.

Instructions

Reorder a column on the Kanboard project board. Provide column_id and the new 1-based position (required — no default). Only ordering changes — to rename a column or change its WIP limit use update_column. Returns { ok: true, column_id, position } 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": {
      "column_id": "<column_id>",
      "position": "<position>"
    },
    "name": "move_column"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`column_id`	Yes	Column id to move (required).
`position`	Yes	New 1-based position within the project board (required).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedMay 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

While no annotations are provided, the description clarifies that only ordering changes are made and specifies the return object. It could mention potential side effects or permissions, but it's adequately transparent for a reordering operation.

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?

The description is concise with two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose. Every sentence adds value, and there is no filler.

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?

Given the simple operation, schema coverage, and lack of output schema, the description is complete enough. It also differentiates from sibling tools and specifies the return value.

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 both parameters are well-described in the schema. The description reaffirms that parameters are required and position is 1-based, adding minimal additional value beyond the schema.

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?

The description clearly states 'Reorder a column on the Kanboard project board' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like update_column and move_swimlane.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly states that both parameters are required and provides an alternative tool (update_column) for renaming or changing WIP limits. The description clearly defines when to use this tool and when not.

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