Trello MCP Server

check_checklist_item

Update a Trello checklist item's status to complete or incomplete to reflect progress on your card.

Instructions

Coche ou décoche un item d'une checklist

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": {
      "cardId": "<cardId>",
      "checkItemId": "<checkItemId>",
      "state": "<state>"
    },
    "name": "check_checklist_item"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`state`	Yes	Parameter state
`cardId`	Yes	Parameter cardId (24 characters)
`checkItemId`	Yes	Parameter checkItemId (24 characters)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.1.0Sep 6, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

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. It does disclose the mutating nature of the operation, but it does not mention permissions, side effects, idempotence, or what happens if the item is already in the requested state. This is comparable to a generic 'update' description.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It directly communicates the core action and object. Appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 low-complexity tool with a fully documented schema, the description plus schema is mostly sufficient for invoking the tool. However, the lack of any usage context or behavioral notes leaves some completeness gaps, especially given the absence of annotations and output schema.

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%, so the schema already documents all three parameters adequately. The description adds minimal semantic context by identifying the item as part of a checklist, but it does not meaningfully enrich the parameter meanings 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 states a specific action ('check or uncheck') applied to a specific resource ('an item of a checklist'), which clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like add_checklist_item or delete_checklist. The verb+resource combination is unambiguous.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no exclusions, and no context such as 'use this after adding a checklist item'. Usage must be inferred entirely from the tool name and schema.

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

Deploy Server