Skip to main content
Glama
olgasafonova

productplan-mcp-server

by olgasafonova

get_bar_children

Read-only

Retrieve child bars nested under a specified parent bar to show sub-tasks or break down features. Returns an empty list when no children exist.

Instructions

Get child bars nested under a parent bar.

USE WHEN: "Show sub-tasks", "Child items", "Break down this feature" FAILS WHEN: bar_id not found. Returns empty list if bar has no children (not all bars are containers).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bar_idYesParent bar ID

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesThe ProductPlan payload (object or array) returned by the API, passed through verbatim
summaryYesHuman-readable summary of the result (e.g. "Found 3 roadmaps")

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv6.0.0
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "properties": {
      +    "data": {
      +      "description": "The ProductPlan payload (object or array) returned by the API, passed through verbatim",
      +      "type": "object"
      +    },
      +    "summary": {
      +      "description": "Human-readable summary of the result (e.g. \"Found 3 roadmaps\")",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "required": [
      +    "summary",
      +    "data"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  2. First observedv5.0.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds valuable behavior beyond annotations: it returns an empty list for non-container bars and fails when bar_id is not found. This is useful, though it doesn't discuss auth or rate limits.

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 compact and front-loaded: one core sentence, then USE WHEN and FAILS WHEN sections. No filler or repetition. Every sentence contributes actionable information.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a simple read-only tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential selection cues, failure behavior, and empty-result edge case. Nothing critical for calling this tool correctly is missing.

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% for the single parameter, with bar_id already described as 'Parent bar ID.' The description does not add extra parameter-level meaning, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get child bars nested under a parent bar.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_bar, get_bar_links, and get_bar_comments. The scope is immediately understandable.

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 USE WHEN section gives concrete trigger phrases like 'Show sub-tasks' and 'Break down this feature,' which helps an agent select this tool. It also notes a failure mode. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use it, but the usage context is clear.

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