Favro MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Create Card

create_card

Add a new Favro card to track tasks, with a required name plus optional board, column, lane, tags, assignees, and description.

Instructions

Create a new card.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`lane`	No	Lane (swimlane) ID or name to place the card in. Only applies to boards with lanes enabled; use list_lanes to see available lanes.
`name`	Yes	Card name/title
`tags`	No	List of tag IDs or names to add
`board`	No	Board ID or name (uses current board if not specified)
`column`	No	Column ID or name to place the card in
`assignees`	No	List of user IDs, names, or emails to assign
`description`	No	Detailed description. Favro supports a subset of Markdown: bold, italic, ~~strikethrough~~, `inline code`, ```code blocks```, [links](url), bullet lists, numbered lists, headings (# and ## only), and horizontal rules (---). Do not use tables, images, blockquotes, checkbox lists, or heading levels beyond ## — unsupported syntax causes the entire description to be stored as plain text. For checklists, use tasklists instead (see update_card's add_tasklist and add_task parameters).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.7.0Jul 21, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / lane

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Lane (swimlane) ID or name to place the card in. Only applies to\nboards with lanes enabled; use list_lanes to see available lanes."
+}

Changed7 schema fields changedv0.3.2May 1, 2026

addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```

addedInput schema / properties / assignees / description

Added value: +"List of user IDs, names, or emails to assign"

addedInput schema / properties / board / description

Added value: +"Board ID or name (uses current board if not specified)"

addedInput schema / properties / column / description

Added value: +"Column ID or name to place the card in"

addedInput schema / properties / description / description

Added value: +"Detailed description. Favro supports a subset of Markdown:\n**bold**, *italic*, ~~strikethrough~~, `inline code`, ```code blocks```,\n[links](url), bullet lists, numbered lists, headings (# and ##\nonly), and horizontal rules (---). Do not use tables, images,\nblockquotes, checkbox lists, or heading levels beyond ## —\nunsupported syntax causes the entire description to be stored as\nplain text. For checklists, use tasklists instead (see update_card's\nadd_tasklist and add_task parameters)."

addedInput schema / properties / name / description
```
Added value: +"Card name/title"
```
addedInput schema / properties / tags / description
```
Added value: +"List of tag IDs or names to add"
```

First observedv0.5.0Feb 5, 2026

TDQS

C2.4/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It says nothing about permissions, side effects, what happens if board/column are omitted, or whether creation is reversible.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The single sentence is technically concise but under-specified rather than appropriately sized. It lacks the structure and front-loaded detail needed for a seven-parameter mutation tool.

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

Completeness2/5

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

An output schema exists and the input schema is fully described, which reduces the required burden. However, for a create mutation tool with no annotations, the description omits prerequisites, defaults, and behavioral context that an agent would still benefit from.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all seven parameters, including defaults and constraints. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that baseline.

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 a clear verb and resource: 'Create a new card.' An agent can distinguish it from read or update siblings, but the description offers no scope or differentiation beyond the name and title.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_card, move_card, or add_comment. The description gives no context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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