productplan-mcp-server

by olgasafonova

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Local

list_roadmaps

Read-only

List all roadmaps to get IDs, names, and update times. Filter by name or sort results for quick navigation.

Instructions

List all roadmaps. START HERE to get roadmap IDs.

USE WHEN: "Show my roadmaps", "What roadmaps do I have?", "Find the Mobile roadmap" Optional server-side filters: name_contains (case-insensitive); sort ("name asc", "updated_at desc"). Returns roadmaps with ID, name, and updated_at. FAILS WHEN: API token invalid or expired (check PRODUCTPLAN_API_TOKEN env var); sort names a field outside the allowed list (the error lists them).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sort`	No	Sort as "field" or "field asc\|desc" (server-side). Fields: id, name, is_version, created_at, updated_at
`name_contains`	No	Only roadmaps whose name contains this text (case-insensitive, server-side)

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.

Changed2 schema fields changedv6.0.0Sep 25, 2026

addedInput schema / properties

Added value: +{
+  "name_contains": {
+    "description": "Only roadmaps 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, is_version, created_at, updated_at",
+    "examples": [
+      "name asc"
+    ],
+    "pattern": "^(id|name|is_version|created_at|updated_at)( (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"
+}

First observedv5.0.0Mar 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond the annotations: it specifies the return fields (ID, name, updated_at), the exact failure conditions (invalid/expired API token, sort field outside allowed list), and that filters are server-side. The annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, which is not contradicted; the description enriches the agent's understanding of edge cases.

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 well-structured with clear sections: purpose, use-when, filters, returns, and fails-when. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and uses line breaks for readability. Every sentence contributes actionable information with zero fluff.

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 list tool with two optional parameters and an output schema present, the description covers all essential aspects: use cases, filter semantics, return fields, and failure modes. The agent has everything needed to decide when to call it and what to expect, including how to handle errors.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by noting that name_contains is case-insensitive and providing example values for sort ('name asc', 'updated_at desc'). These details clarify usage beyond the schema's formal definitions, earning a 4.

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 opens with 'List all roadmaps' and 'START HERE to get roadmap IDs', which is a specific verb+resource that clearly distinguishes this tool from get_roadmap (which fetches a single roadmap). It also states the primary use case for obtaining IDs, making its purpose unmistakable.

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?

It explicitly lists trigger phrases ('Show my roadmaps', 'What roadmaps do I have?', 'Find the Mobile roadmap') and describes optional filters. However, it does not explicitly state when to use an alternative (e.g., get_roadmap for a specific roadmap), though 'START HERE' implies it is the entry point. Slight gap in naming alternatives, 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.

Deploy Server