Skip to main content
Glama

get-document-item

Retrieve information about a specific document item on a Miro board by providing board and item identifiers.

Instructions

Retrieve information about a specific document item on a Miro board

Input Schema

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

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that validates inputs, calls the Miro API to retrieve the document item, and returns the data as JSON or an error response.
    fn: async ({ boardId, itemId }) => {
      try {
        if (!boardId) {
          return ServerResponse.error("Board ID is required");
        }
        
        if (!itemId) {
          return ServerResponse.error("Item ID is required");
        }
    
        const documentData = await MiroClient.getApi().getDocumentItem(boardId, itemId);
        return ServerResponse.text(JSON.stringify(documentData, null, 2));
      } catch (error) {
        return ServerResponse.error(error);
      }
    }
  • The ToolSchema definition including name, description, and Zod input schema for boardId and itemId.
    const getDocumentItemTool: ToolSchema = {
      name: "get-document-item",
      description: "Retrieve information about a specific document item on a Miro board",
      args: {
        boardId: z.string().describe("Unique identifier (ID) of the board that contains the document"),
        itemId: z.string().describe("Unique identifier (ID) of the document that you want to retrieve")
      },
  • src/index.ts:143-143 (registration)
    Registration of the getDocumentItemTool in the ToolBootstrapper chain.
    .register(getDocumentItemTool)
  • src/index.ts:42-42 (registration)
    Import of the getDocumentItemTool for registration.
    import getDocumentItemTool from './tools/getDocumentItem.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 the tool retrieves information, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't clarify permissions required, rate limits, error handling, or what information is returned (e.g., metadata, content). This leaves significant gaps 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 directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the core action ('Retrieve information'), making it easy to parse quickly, and every part of the sentence contributes to understanding the tool's function.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete for a retrieval tool. It doesn't explain what information is returned (e.g., document content, metadata, or status), potential errors, or behavioral traits like authentication needs. This makes it inadequate for an agent to fully understand how to use the tool effectively.

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 description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what's in the input schema, which has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for both required parameters (boardId and itemId). Since the schema does the heavy lifting, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the description doesn't compensate with additional context like format examples or usage tips.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('information about a specific document item on a Miro board'), making it easy to understand what it does. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get-specific-item' or 'get-app-card-item', which appear to retrieve other item types, so it doesn't fully distinguish itself from alternatives.

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 when to choose it over similar sibling tools (e.g., 'get-specific-item' for generic items or 'get-app-card-item' for app cards), nor does it specify any prerequisites or exclusions 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