Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
HacknPlan MCP

HacknPlan MCP

by jompereira
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

get_board

Retrieve detailed information about a specific board in your HacknPlan game development project by providing the project and board IDs.

Instructions

Get details of a specific 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": {
      "projectId": "<projectId>",
      "boardId": "<boardId>"
    },
    "name": "get_board"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
boardIdYes
projectIdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits (e.g., read-only, authentication needs, side effects). The description simply repeats the tool's purpose without adding transparency.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is one sentence, short and front-loaded. However, it is too minimal, lacking key details that could fit concisely, such as required parameters or typical usage.

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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and only two parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what 'details' are returned, any prerequisites, or error conditions, leaving the agent underinformed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema defines two parameters (boardId, projectId) but the description adds no meaning. With 0% schema description coverage, the agent must rely solely on parameter names, which are ambiguous (e.g., projectId is not explained).

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 'Get details of a specific board' clearly identifies the action (get) and resource (board). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_boards and get_board_metrics, though it doesn't explicitly state the scope.

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 list_boards or get_board_metrics. An agent has no context for tool selection.

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