Get board list
weeek_get_board_listRetrieve all boards for a specified project by providing the project ID.
Instructions
GET /tm/boards. Get board list. Tags: Board.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes |
weeek_get_board_listRetrieve all boards for a specified project by providing the project ID.
GET /tm/boards. Get board list. Tags: Board.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions HTTP method and tags, but does not state that it is read-only, safe, or idempotent. Lacks critical behavioral context.
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?
Description is extremely short (three fragments) and mostly repeats the title. It lacks structured information; every sentence should add value, but here it adds none beyond redundancy.
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?
Given the nested input schema (object with required projectId) and no output schema, the description provides almost no context. The agent cannot understand how to invoke the tool correctly or what to expect.
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?
Schema has 0% description coverage and the description adds no meaning to parameters. The required projectId is not explained; the agent cannot infer its purpose or usage from the description alone.
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?
Description states 'Get board list' which clearly identifies the action and resource. However, it lacks differentiation from sibling tools like weeek_get_project_list or weeek_get_board_column_list, but the purpose is still clear.
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 vs alternatives. Missing context on prerequisites (e.g., need a projectId) or when not to use it. The description does not help the agent decide.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/maxwellviksna-stack/weeek-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server