Fetch all groups on a Miro board by board ID, using cursor pagination to page through results.
List all groups on a board (cursor-paginated).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| cursor | No | ||
| board_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden; it does disclose that results are cursor-paginated, which is real behavioral information the schema's 'cursor' param alone doesn't explain. However, it says nothing about permissions, whether hidden/archived groups are included, or default page size.
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?
One short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and scope, with the pagination parenthetical usefully attached. Nothing wasted, though there is very little content to be concise about.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. But for a paginated list tool with zero schema-description coverage and no annotations, the description is too thin on parameter behavior (limit, board_id) to fully equip 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?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate and largely fails: 'cursor-paginated' hints at the cursor param but doesn't explain iteration semantics, and limit (default 50) and board_id are never mentioned. Two of three parameters remain opaque.
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 a specific verb and resource ('List all groups') scoped to a board, which cleanly separates it from get_group, create_group, update_group, ungroup and get_group_items. It does not explicitly name any sibling, but the resource scope makes the distinction obvious.
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 versus get_group (single) or get_group_items (contents), and no prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must infer usage purely from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.