Trello MCP Server

Move List to Board

move_list_to_board

Move any Trello list to another board. Provide the list ID and destination board ID to relocate tasks between projects.

Instructions

Move a list to a different board.

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": {
      "listId": "<listId>",
      "boardId": "<boardId>"
    },
    "name": "move_list_to_board"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`listId`	Yes	The ID of the list to move
`boardId`	Yes	The ID of the destination board

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.2.0Sep 6, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to state what happens to the cards within the moved list, whether the operation affects the source board, how position is determined, or any side effects. For a mutation tool, this is a significant transparency gap.

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 a single efficient sentence with no wasted words, and the key action is front-loaded. However, it overlaps heavily with the title and earns only partial credit for the 'different' nuance it adds.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is under-specified. It does not disclose side effects on cards, success/failure behavior, or whether the move is reversible. An agent would need to infer the semantics of moving a list from external knowledge rather than from this definition.

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 description coverage is 100%, with both listId and boardId already documented clearly in the schema. The description adds only the nuance that the destination is 'a different board,' which is marginal. Since the schema does the heavy lifting, the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb (move), resource (list), and destination (a different board), making the core operation clear. It is distinct from move_card and move_all_cards at a glance, though it doesn't explicitly name those siblings. The description adds only marginal meaning beyond the title.

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 such as move_all_cards, archive_list, or update_list. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., permission on both boards), no exclusions, and no stated conditions that would route an agent to a sibling tool.

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

Deploy Server