Skip to main content
Glama
m0xai

Trello MCP Server with Python

by m0xai

get_list

Retrieve a specific Trello list by its ID to access list details and manage board organization.

Instructions

Retrieves a specific list by its ID.

Args:
    list_id (str): The ID of the list to retrieve.

Returns:
    TrelloList: The list object containing list details.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
list_idYes

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function for the 'get_list' MCP tool. It handles the context, logging, error handling, and delegates to the ListService.
    async def get_list(ctx: Context, list_id: str) -> TrelloList:
        """Retrieves a specific list by its ID.
    
        Args:
            list_id (str): The ID of the list to retrieve.
    
        Returns:
            TrelloList: The list object containing list details.
        """
        try:
            logger.info(f"Getting list with ID: {list_id}")
            result = await service.get_list(list_id)
            logger.info(f"Successfully retrieved list: {list_id}")
            return result
        except Exception as e:
            error_msg = f"Failed to get list: {str(e)}"
            logger.error(error_msg)
            await ctx.error(error_msg)
            raise
  • Registers the 'get_list' tool with the MCP server instance.
    mcp.add_tool(list.get_list)
  • Helper method in ListService that makes the actual Trello API call to fetch the list by ID.
    async def get_list(self, list_id: str) -> TrelloList:
        """Retrieves a specific list by its ID.
    
        Args:
            list_id (str): The ID of the list to retrieve.
    
        Returns:
            TrelloList: The list object containing list details.
        """
        response = await self.client.GET(f"/lists/{list_id}")
        return TrelloList(**response)
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 this is a retrieval operation, implying it's likely read-only and non-destructive, but doesn't explicitly confirm this or mention any behavioral traits like authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or response format details. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this represents a significant gap in transparency.

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 perfectly concise and well-structured with three clear sections: a purpose statement, parameter explanation, and return value description. Each sentence earns its place by providing essential information without redundancy, and the information is front-loaded with the core purpose stated first.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's low complexity (single parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose, parameter meaning, and return type, but lacks details on behavioral aspects, error handling, or usage context. Without annotations or output schema, more completeness would be beneficial, but it meets the minimum viable threshold for this simple tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description adds meaningful context for the single parameter 'list_id' by explaining it's 'The ID of the list to retrieve,' which clarifies its purpose beyond the schema's basic type information. With 0% schema description coverage and only one parameter, this compensation is effective, though it doesn't provide format examples or validation rules. The baseline would be 3 for high schema coverage, but here the description meaningfully enhances 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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Retrieves') and resource ('a specific list by its ID'), making it easy to understand what the tool does. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'get_lists' (which likely retrieves multiple lists) or 'get_board' (which might include list information), so it doesn't reach the highest score for 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. It doesn't mention sibling tools like 'get_lists' for retrieving multiple lists or 'get_board' which might include list details, nor does it specify prerequisites or contexts for usage. This leaves the agent without explicit direction on tool selection.

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/m0xai/trello-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server