DragApp MCP Server

toggle_ai_drafts

Enable or disable AI-generated draft replies for a board, choosing between automatic or manual creation.

Instructions

Enable or disable AI-generated draft replies for a board. When enabling, you must choose a category: 'automatic' (drafts created without prompting) or 'manual' (drafts created on demand).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "boardId": "<boardId>",
      "enabled": "<enabled>"
    },
    "name": "toggle_ai_drafts"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`boardId`	Yes	The board ID
`enabled`	Yes	true to enable AI drafts, false to disable
`category`	No	Required when enabling. Defaults to 'automatic'.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.5Jul 7, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that enabling requires a category and explains the two options, but it does not describe potential side effects, permissions needed, or what happens to existing drafts when toggling. The behavioral disclosure is adequate but not rich.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second adds the critical conditional about category. The description is efficiently front-loaded.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main points: what it does, the required condition for enabling, and the two categories. It could be more complete by mentioning permissions or behavior when disabling, but it is largely sufficient for a simple toggle tool.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context for the 'category' parameter by defining 'automatic' and 'manual', but it does not significantly enhance the meaning of 'boardId' or 'enabled' beyond their schema descriptions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's function: enabling or disabling AI-generated draft replies for a board. It is specific about the resource (AI drafts) and the action (toggle), and it distinguishes from sibling tools like toggle_labels or toggle_automation by focusing on draft replies.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides guidance on when to use each category ('automatic' vs 'manual') when enabling. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or mention alternatives among siblings, which would warrant a 5.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.