Retrieve a Kanban board's task template string to use as a starting point for creating tasks. Provide the project root directory path to fetch the template.
Get the board's task template string.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | No | Path to the project root directory |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It simply says 'Get' without stating that it is a read-only operation or what happens if the board does not exist. It does not mention permissions, side effects, or error conditions, so agents have no behavioral expectations beyond the action word.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence, highly concise and front-loaded with the core action. There is no redundant phrasing or extraneous information, making it efficient for an agent to parse.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple getter with one optional parameter, the description identifies what is retrieved (a string) but does not specify prerequisites (e.g., an initialized board) or error behavior. It also does not explain the significance of the template or when to use it, leaving some gaps for an agent.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The parameter 'path' is fully described in the schema (100% coverage) as 'Path to the project root directory'. The description adds no additional meaning about how the path is used or its defaults, so it does not compensate beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States exactly what it retrieves – the board's task template string. The verb 'Get' and resource are specific, and none of the sibling tools share this exact purpose, so an agent can distinguish it without opening other schemas.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention when it should be invoked or any exclusions. While the name suggests it's for retrieving a template, there is no explicit context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.