Skip to main content
Glama

get_board

Retrieve details for a specific project board by providing its board ID, enabling AI assistants to access and manage board information within the FluentBoards project management system.

Instructions

Get details of a specific board

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
board_idYesBoard ID

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function that validates access to the board, fetches board details using the API client, and returns a formatted response.
    async (args) => {
      const { board_id } = args;
    
      // Validate board access
      const accessCheck = validateBoardAccess(board_id);
      if (!accessCheck.allowed) {
        return formatResponse(createBoardFocusError(accessCheck));
      }
    
      const response = await api.get(`/projects/${board_id}`);
      return formatResponse(response.data);
    }
  • Zod input schema defining board_id as a positive integer.
    {
      board_id: z.number().int().positive().describe("Board ID"),
    },
  • Registers the get_board tool on the MCP server with name, description, input schema, and handler function.
    server.tool(
      "get_board",
      "Get details of a specific board",
      {
        board_id: z.number().int().positive().describe("Board ID"),
      },
      async (args) => {
        const { board_id } = args;
    
        // Validate board access
        const accessCheck = validateBoardAccess(board_id);
        if (!accessCheck.allowed) {
          return formatResponse(createBoardFocusError(accessCheck));
        }
    
        const response = await api.get(`/projects/${board_id}`);
        return formatResponse(response.data);
      }
    );
  • Helper function to validate if access to a specific board is allowed based on board focus configuration. Used in get_board handler.
    export function validateBoardAccess(boardId: number): BoardFocusResult {
      const { boardFocus } = config;
    
      // If board focus is not enabled, allow all boards
      if (!boardFocus.enabled || !boardFocus.boardId) {
        return { allowed: true };
      }
    
      // Check if the requested board matches the focused board
      if (boardId !== boardFocus.boardId) {
        return {
          allowed: false,
          reason: `Operations are focused on board ${boardFocus.boardId}. Access to board ${boardId} is outside the current focus scope.`,
          code: "OUT_OF_FOCUS"
        };
      }
    
      return { allowed: true };
    }
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 states this is a read operation ('Get'), but doesn't cover aspects like authentication needs, error handling, rate limits, or what 'details' include (e.g., fields returned). This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary words. Every part earns its place by clearly stating the action and target, making it appropriately sized for this simple tool.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does but lacks details on behavior, usage context, or output, leaving gaps that could hinder an agent's effective use.

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 the single parameter 'board_id' documented as 'Board ID' in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, such as format examples or constraints, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage without compensating value.

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 clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('details of a specific board'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from similar siblings like 'get_task' or 'list_tasks' beyond the resource type, which prevents a perfect score.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a board ID), exclusions, or comparisons to siblings like 'list_tasks' for broader queries, leaving the agent to infer usage from context alone.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/danieliser/fluent-boards-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server