Skip to main content
Glama

get-all-tags

Retrieve all tags from a Miro board to organize and categorize content. Specify board ID and optional pagination parameters.

Instructions

Retrieve all tags on a Miro board

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
boardIdYesUnique identifier (ID) of the board for which you want to retrieve all tags
limitNoMaximum number of tags to return (default: 50)
offsetNoOffset for pagination (default: 0)

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function that retrieves all tags from a specified Miro board, supporting pagination with limit and offset parameters, using the MiroClient API.
    fn: async ({ boardId, limit, offset }) => {
      try {
        if (!boardId) {
          return ServerResponse.error("Board ID is required");
        }
    
        const query: Record<string, any> = {};
        
        if (limit !== undefined) {
          query.limit = limit;
        }
        
        if (offset !== undefined) {
          query.offset = offset;
        }
    
        const result = await MiroClient.getApi().getTagsFromBoard(boardId, query);
        return ServerResponse.text(JSON.stringify(result, null, 2));
      } catch (error) {
        return ServerResponse.error(error);
      }
    }
  • Tool schema including name, description, and Zod-validated input parameters for boardId (required), limit, and offset.
    const getAllTagsTool: ToolSchema = {
      name: "get-all-tags",
      description: "Retrieve all tags on a Miro board",
      args: {
        boardId: z.string().describe("Unique identifier (ID) of the board for which you want to retrieve all tags"),
        limit: z.number().optional().nullish().describe("Maximum number of tags to return (default: 50)"),
        offset: z.number().optional().nullish().describe("Offset for pagination (default: 0)")
      },
  • src/index.ts:167-167 (registration)
    Registration of the getAllTagsTool into the ToolBootstrapper instance.
    .register(getAllTagsTool)
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states a read operation ('Retrieve'), implying it's non-destructive, but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or response format. This is insufficient for a tool with parameters and no output schema.

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 with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 the tool has 3 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., tag list format), behavioral aspects like pagination with limit/offset, or error conditions, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with clear documentation for 'boardId', 'limit', and 'offset'. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 ('Retrieve') and resource ('all tags on a Miro board'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get-tag' (singular) or 'get-item-tags', which might retrieve tags for specific items rather than the entire board.

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 sibling tools like 'get-tag' (for a single tag) or 'get-item-tags' (for tags on specific items), nor does it specify prerequisites or contexts for usage.

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/k-jarzyna/mcp-miro'

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