Skip to main content
Glama

get-text-item

Retrieve specific text item details from a Miro board using board and item IDs to access content information.

Instructions

Retrieve information about a specific text item on a Miro board

Input Schema

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

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that executes the tool logic: validates inputs, fetches the text item data from Miro API using boardId and itemId, and returns formatted JSON 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 textData = await MiroClient.getApi().getTextItem(boardId, itemId);
        return ServerResponse.text(JSON.stringify(textData, null, 2));
      } catch (error) {
        return ServerResponse.error(error);
      }
    }
  • Tool schema defining the name, description, and input arguments with Zod validation schemas for boardId and itemId.
    const getTextItemTool: ToolSchema = {
      name: "get-text-item",
      description: "Retrieve information about a specific text item on a Miro board",
      args: {
        boardId: z.string().describe("Unique identifier (ID) of the board that contains the text item"),
        itemId: z.string().describe("Unique identifier (ID) of the text item that you want to retrieve")
      },
  • src/index.ts:147-147 (registration)
    Registers the get-text-item tool with the ToolBootstrapper instance.
    .register(getTextItemTool)
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 the tool retrieves information, implying a read-only operation, but does not specify details like authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or the format of returned data. This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves in practice.

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, clear sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficient, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly, with no wasted information.

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 tool that retrieves data. It does not explain what information is returned, potential errors, or behavioral traits like permissions, leaving the agent with insufficient context to use the tool effectively beyond basic parameter input.

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, clearly documenting both parameters ('boardId' and 'itemId') as unique identifiers. The description adds no additional semantic context beyond what the schema provides, such as examples or constraints, so it meets the baseline for adequate but not enhanced parameter understanding.

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 information about') and resource ('a specific text item on a Miro board'), making the purpose evident. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get-specific-item' or 'get-items-on-board', which might retrieve similar or broader information, so it falls short of a perfect 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 such as 'get-specific-item' or 'get-items-on-board', nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. It lacks explicit usage context, leaving the agent to infer based on tool names alone.

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