Skip to main content
Glama

get-item-tags

Retrieve all tags attached to a specific item on a Miro board using board and item identifiers to organize and categorize content.

Instructions

Retrieve all tags attached to a specific item on a Miro board

Input Schema

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

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that executes the 'get-item-tags' tool logic. It validates inputs, calls MiroClient.getApi().getTagsFromItem(boardId, itemId), and returns the JSON stringified result or 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 result = await MiroClient.getApi().getTagsFromItem(boardId, itemId);
        return ServerResponse.text(JSON.stringify(result, null, 2));
      } catch (error) {
        return ServerResponse.error(error);
      }
    }
  • The ToolSchema definition including name, description, and Zod input schema for boardId and itemId parameters.
    const getItemTagsTool: ToolSchema = {
      name: "get-item-tags",
      description: "Retrieve all tags attached to a specific item on a Miro board",
      args: {
        boardId: z.string().describe("Unique identifier (ID) of the board that contains the item"),
        itemId: z.string().describe("Unique identifier (ID) of the item whose tags you want to retrieve"),
      },
  • src/index.ts:172-172 (registration)
    The registration of the getItemTagsTool in the ToolBootstrapper chain.
    .register(getItemTagsTool)
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool retrieves tags but does not disclose behavioral traits like whether it requires authentication, has rate limits, returns paginated results, or handles errors. 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 directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized, with zero waste.

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 and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on return values, error handling, or behavioral context, which are crucial for a tool with two required parameters and no structured output information.

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 clear descriptions for 'boardId' and 'itemId'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as format examples or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate as 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 action ('Retrieve all tags') and target ('attached to a specific item on a Miro board'), which is specific and unambiguous. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get-all-tags' or 'get-tag', which might retrieve tags in different contexts, so it misses full sibling differentiation.

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, such as 'get-all-tags' for all tags on a board or 'get-tag' for a specific tag. It lacks explicit context, exclusions, or prerequisites, leaving usage unclear relative to siblings.

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