Skip to main content
Glama
olgasafonova

productplan-mcp-server

by olgasafonova
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Local

list_ideas

Read-only

List ideas in the discovery pipeline to review customer feedback and find specific ideas by name, channel, or sort order.

Instructions

List all ideas in discovery pipeline. START HERE for ideas.

USE WHEN: "Show customer feedback", "What ideas do we have?", "Ideas mentioning SSO" Optional server-side filters: name_contains (case-insensitive), channel (exact); sort ("name asc"). Returns ideas with ID, name, channel, and opportunities_count. FAILS WHEN: API token invalid; sort names a field outside the allowed list (the error lists them). Returns empty list if no ideas exist.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sortNoSort as "field" or "field asc|desc" (server-side). Fields: id, name, description, channel, customer, opportunities_count, source_name, source_email, location_status
channelNoOnly ideas from this channel, exact match (server-side)
name_containsNoOnly ideas whose name contains this text (case-insensitive, server-side)

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. Changed2 schema fields changedv6.0.0
    • addedInput schema / properties
      Added value: +{
+  "channel": {
+    "description": "Only ideas from this channel, exact match (server-side)",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "name_contains": {
+    "description": "Only ideas whose name contains this text (case-insensitive, server-side)",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "sort": {
+    "description": "Sort as \"field\" or \"field asc|desc\" (server-side). Fields: id, name, description, channel, customer, opportunities_count, source_name, source_email, location_status",
+    "examples": [
+      "name asc"
+    ],
+    "pattern": "^(id|name|description|channel|customer|opportunities_count|source_name|source_email|location_status)( (asc|desc))?$",
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+}
    • 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

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, and description adds failure modes (invalid token, invalid sort field), empty-list behavior, and server-side filtering semantics. This goes well beyond the structured annotations.

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, uses labeled sections, and front-loads the entry-point guidance. No wasted words.

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?

With 3 optional well-documented params, an output schema, and read-only annotations, the description covers return fields, filter semantics, and failure conditions. Nothing essential is missing for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema covers 100% of parameters, but the description adds practical semantics: case-insensitive name matching, exact channel matching, and a sort example. It clarifies the optionality and server-side execution.

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?

Description opens with 'List all ideas in discovery pipeline,' a specific verb-resource pair that identifies this as the collection retrieval tool. The 'START HERE' marker and 'List all' clearly distinguish it from singular get_idea and mutating manage_idea siblings.

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?

Provides explicit 'USE WHEN' examples ('Show customer feedback', 'What ideas do we have?') that tell an agent when to invoke it. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the context is clear enough.

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