Skip to main content
Glama
olgasafonova

productplan-mcp-server

by olgasafonova
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Local

get_idea_form

Read-only

Provide a form ID to get the field details of an idea form and reveal what data it collects.

Instructions

Get idea form details with fields.

USE WHEN: "Show form fields", "What does this form collect?" FAILS WHEN: form_id not found (get valid IDs from list_idea_forms).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
form_idYesForm ID from list_idea_forms

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

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description does not need to restate that it's read-only. The description adds context about typical user queries (showing form fields) and failure conditions, which is useful. However, it does not disclose details about the response structure or potential errors beyond the mention in FAILS WHEN, which is acceptable given the output schema exists.

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 very brief and front-loaded with the core purpose. The USE WHEN and FAILS WHEN sections are tersely phrased and each sentence adds value. No fluff or unnecessary details.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter, an output schema, and read-only annotation. The description covers the essential use case and failure handling. It could mention that the returned data includes form fields, but the description already says 'with fields'. Given the simplicity, it is nearly complete.

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?

The schema has 100% coverage; the only parameter 'form_id' is well-described as 'Form ID from list_idea_forms' in both schema and description. The description adds a hint about obtaining valid IDs from list_idea_forms, which is slightly redundant but confirms the origin. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, so a 3 is appropriate.

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 states the tool retrieves idea form details with fields, indicating a read operation. It is distinct from sibling 'list_idea_forms' which likely lists forms, but the description does not explicitly differentiate from other get_* tools. However, the specific resource and action are clear.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description includes an explicit 'USE WHEN' section listing example user queries, and a 'FAILS WHEN' section that tells the agent what to do if the form_id is not found, directing to list_idea_forms for valid IDs. This provides clear guidance on when to use and how to handle failure.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools