Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
workspace-board-mcp

workspace-board-mcp

by FURYER
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

Delete board card

board_delete_card

Remove a card from a kanban board by its ID (e.g., T-1 or #T-1). Specify the workspace path and card ID.

Instructions

Delete a card by id (T-N / #T-N).

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": {
      "workspace": "<workspace>",
      "card_id": "<card_id>"
    },
    "name": "board_delete_card"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
card_idYes
workspaceYesAbsolute path to the project workspace root (contains .webcli/board.json)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits like irreversibility or side effects. It only states 'Delete', which is minimally informative and lacks clarity on consequences or requirements.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is one sentence, concise and front-loaded. It efficiently communicates the core action but could be slightly more structured.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple delete-by-id tool, the description is adequate but does not mention success/error outputs or any additional behavior. It meets minimum viability but has gaps.

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?

The description adds value by specifying the card ID format (T-N / #T-N), compensating for the missing schema description on the card_id parameter. The workspace parameter is described in 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 the action (delete) and resource (card), and specifies the id format (T-N / #T-N), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like board_delete_column or board_add_card.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like board_update_card or board_add_card. No prerequisites or context are provided.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools