Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Milanote MCP Server

Milanote MCP Server

by cotletdev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Unpublish board

unpublish_board
Destructive

Disable a board's read-only share link to revoke public access; editors keep their access and the link stops working for anyone who had it.

Instructions

Turn off a board's read-only link; people who had it can no longer open the board.

Does what switching off Share, Enable read-only link does. Editors keep their access. publish_board turns the same link back on, so anyone who kept it can open the board again. was_published is false when the board had no link.

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": {
      "board_id": "<board_id>"
    },
    "name": "unpublish_board"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
board_idYesBoard ID from list_boards, or the board URL.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag this as a destructive, non-read-only, non-idempotent write; the description adds exactly the context they can't: the blast radius (anyone holding the link loses access), the important nuance that editors retain access, reversibility (publish_board restores the same link so former holders can reopen it), and the return signal was_published=false when no link existed. This also explains the playIdempotent=false consequence of a second call.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and consequence in the first sentence, then supporting details. The UI-equivalence sentence ('switching off Share, Enable read-only link') is slightly product-specific phrasing but earns its place by grounding the action; otherwise tight with no filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by documenting the was_published return flag as well as the access impact and reversibility path. For a single-parameter destructive toggle, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret it correctly.

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 the single board_id parameter is documented in the schema (including that a board URL is acceptable). The description adds nothing about the identifier itself, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Turn off a board's read-only link') with the user-visible consequence, and explicitly contrasts with the sibling publish_board, which does the inverse. An agent can distinguish this from publish_board and from editor/permission tools like remove_editor without opening a schema.

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?

Gives a concrete anchor for when to use it ('Does what switching off Share, Enable read-only link does') and names the alternative for the opposite operation (publish_board). It does not spell out exclusions, e.g. that this does not revoke editor access or delete the board, but it does state editors keep their access, which implicitly rules out a permissions-revocation interpretation.

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