Skip to main content
Glama

get-card-item

Retrieve information about a specific card item on a Miro board using board and item identifiers to access card details.

Instructions

Retrieve information about a specific card item on a Miro board

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
boardIdYesUnique identifier (ID) of the board that contains the card
itemIdYesUnique identifier (ID) of the card that you want to retrieve

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function for the 'get-card-item' tool. It validates the boardId and itemId parameters, fetches the card item data using MiroClient.getApi().getCardItem, and returns the JSON stringified response or an error.
    fn: async ({ boardId, itemId }) => {
      try {
        if (!boardId) {
          return ServerResponse.error("Board ID is required");
        }
        
        if (!itemId) {
          return ServerResponse.error("Item ID is required");
        }
    
        const itemData = await MiroClient.getApi().getCardItem(boardId, itemId);
    
        return ServerResponse.text(JSON.stringify(itemData, null, 2));
      } catch (error) {
        return ServerResponse.error(error);
      }
    }
  • The ToolSchema definition for 'get-card-item', including the tool name, description, and Zod schemas for input parameters boardId and itemId.
    const getCardItemTool: ToolSchema = {
      name: "get-card-item",
      description: "Retrieve information about a specific card item on a Miro board",
      args: {
        boardId: z.string().describe("Unique identifier (ID) of the board that contains the card"),
        itemId: z.string().describe("Unique identifier (ID) of the card that you want to retrieve")
      },
  • src/index.ts:126-126 (registration)
    Registration of the getCardItemTool using the ToolBootstrapper's register method on the MCP server.
    .register(getCardItemTool)
  • src/index.ts:25-25 (registration)
    Import of the getCardItemTool from its definition file, enabling registration.
    import getCardItemTool from './tools/getCardItem.js';
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 retrieval operation, implying it's read-only, but doesn't clarify permissions, rate limits, error handling, or what information is returned (e.g., fields, format). For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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 directly states the tool's purpose without any redundant or unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to understand at a glance.

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 (simple retrieval with 2 parameters) and high schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it fails to fully compensate for missing behavioral and return value details, leaving room for improvement in completeness.

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 both parameters (boardId and itemId). The description adds no additional semantic context beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or relationships between parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 the resource 'specific card item on a Miro board', making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get-specific-item' or 'get-items-on-board', which could also retrieve card items, so it doesn't reach the highest 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 like 'get-specific-item' or 'get-items-on-board', nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. It merely states what the tool does without contextual usage information.

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