productplan-mcp-server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

get_roadmap_lanes

Read-only

Retrieve lanes or categories organizing bars into rows on a ProductPlan roadmap. Returns ID, name, description, and position for each lane to clarify roadmap structure.

Instructions

Get lanes (categories) on a roadmap. Lanes organize bars into rows.

USE WHEN: "What lanes are on the roadmap?", "Show categories" Returns array of lanes with ID, name, description, and position (the API exposes no lane color). FAILS WHEN: roadmap_id not found (use list_roadmaps).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`roadmap_id`	Yes	Roadmap ID

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes	The ProductPlan payload (object or array) returned by the API, passed through verbatim
`summary`	Yes	Human-readable summary of the result (e.g. "Found 3 roadmaps")

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv6.0.0Sep 25, 2026

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"
+}

First observedv5.0.0Mar 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral detail beyond annotations: it specifies the returned fields, confirms the API exposes no lane color, and documents the failure mode for an invalid roadmap_id.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, and uses clear labeled sections ('USE WHEN', 'FAILS WHEN'). Every sentence contributes either selection guidance, return shape, or failure behavior without redundancy.

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 getter with one required parameter, 100% schema coverage, an output schema, and relevant annotations, the description covers purpose, usage conditions, returned data, and failure handling. Nothing essential 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%, so the description does not need to compensate. The description does add helpful context about roadmap_id being the identifier whose absence causes failure, but it does not add new parameter-level semantics beyond the schema's 'Roadmap ID' definition.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Get lanes on a roadmap') and immediately clarifies the domain concept: 'Lanes organize bars into rows.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_roadmap_milestones or get_roadmap_legends.

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?

It includes explicit 'USE WHEN' example queries ('What lanes are on the roadmap?', 'Show categories') and a concrete failure-handling instruction with the alternative tool ('use list_roadmaps'). This gives an agent clear conditions for selection and fallback.

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

Deploy Server