Skip to main content
Glama

get-mindmap-nodes

Retrieve mind map nodes from a Miro board to analyze content structure and extract hierarchical information for integration or analysis purposes.

Instructions

Retrieve a list of mind map nodes on a Miro board

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
boardIdYesUnique identifier (ID) of the board from which you want to retrieve mind map nodes
limitNoMaximum number of results to return (default: 50)
cursorNoCursor for pagination

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that implements the tool logic: fetches mind map nodes from a specified Miro board using the MiroClient API, handles pagination parameters, and returns the response as JSON.
    fn: async ({ boardId, limit, cursor }) => {
      try {
        // Prepare query parameters
        const query: any = {};
        if (limit) query.limit = limit.toString();
        if (cursor) query.cursor = cursor;
    
        const response = await MiroClient.getApi().getMindmapNodesExperimental(boardId, query);
    
        return ServerResponse.text(JSON.stringify(response.body, null, 2));
      } catch (error) {
        process.stderr.write(`Error retrieving Miro mind map nodes: ${error}\n`);
        return ServerResponse.error(error);
      }
    }
  • Defines the tool schema including name, description, and Zod-validated input parameters for boardId, optional limit, and cursor.
    const getMindmapNodesTool: ToolSchema = {
      name: "get-mindmap-nodes",
      description: "Retrieve a list of mind map nodes on a Miro board",
      args: {
        boardId: z.string().describe("Unique identifier (ID) of the board from which you want to retrieve mind map nodes"),
        limit: z.number().optional().nullish().describe("Maximum number of results to return (default: 50)"),
        cursor: z.string().optional().nullish().describe("Cursor for pagination")
      },
  • src/index.ts:188-188 (registration)
    Registers the getMindmapNodesTool with the central ToolBootstrapper instance.
    .register(getMindmapNodesTool)
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 action is to 'retrieve a list,' implying a read-only operation, but doesn't mention any behavioral traits like pagination behavior (implied by the 'cursor' parameter), rate limits, authentication needs, or what happens if no nodes exist. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with pagination parameters.

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 front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary words. It directly states what the tool does, making it easy to parse quickly, though it could benefit from additional context for completeness.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and parameters implying pagination ('limit', 'cursor'), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the return format (e.g., list structure, node details), pagination mechanics, or error conditions, leaving the agent with insufficient context to use the tool effectively beyond basic invocation.

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, providing clear documentation for 'boardId', 'limit', and 'cursor'. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, such as explaining the relationship between 'limit' and 'cursor' or default behaviors. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('list of mind map nodes on a Miro board'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get-mindmap-node' (singular) or 'get-items-on-board', which could retrieve similar content, leaving room for confusion about 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'get-mindmap-node' (singular) and 'get-items-on-board' that might overlap, there's no indication of when this list-focused tool is preferred, such as for bulk retrieval or paginated results.

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