Favro MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Update Card

update_card

Change a card's name, description, tasks, lane, or custom fields. Use this to update existing Favro cards and keep project information current.

Instructions

Update a card's properties.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`card`	Yes	Card ID, sequential ID (#123), or name
`lane`	No	Lane (swimlane) ID or name to move the card into. Only applies to boards with lanes enabled; use list_lanes to see available lanes.
`name`	No	New card name
`board`	No	Board ID or name (needed for sequential ID or name lookup)
`tasks`	No	List of task updates. Each dict should contain 'task_id' and optionally 'completed' (bool) or 'name' (str) to update
`add_task`	No	Add a task (checkbox item) to an existing tasklist: {'tasklist_id': '...', 'name': '...'}
`archived`	No	Archive or unarchive the card
`description`	No	New 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 the add_tasklist and add_task parameters instead.
`add_tasklist`	No	Create a new checklist on this card with this name. This is how checklists work in Favro — they are tasklists, not markdown checkboxes in the description. Returns the tasklist_id needed for add_task.
`custom_fields`	No	List of custom field updates. Each dict should contain 'customFieldId' and the appropriate value field for the field type: - Text: {'customFieldId': '...', 'value': 'text'} - Number/Rating: {'customFieldId': '...', 'total': 5} - Link: {'customFieldId': '...', 'link': {'url': '...', 'text': '...'}} - Checkbox: {'customFieldId': '...', 'value': True} - Date: {'customFieldId': '...', 'value': '2024-01-15'} - Status: {'customFieldId': '...', 'value': ['itemId1', 'itemId2']}

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 move the card into. Only applies to\nboards with lanes enabled; use list_lanes to see available lanes."
+}

Changed10 schema fields changedv0.3.2May 1, 2026

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

addedInput schema / properties / add_task / description

Added value: +"Add a task (checkbox item) to an existing tasklist:\n{'tasklist_id': '...', 'name': '...'}"

addedInput schema / properties / add_tasklist / description

Added value: +"Create a new checklist on this card with this name. This is\nhow checklists work in Favro — they are tasklists, not markdown\ncheckboxes in the description. Returns the tasklist_id needed for\nadd_task."

addedInput schema / properties / archived / description
```
Added value: +"Archive or unarchive the card"
```

addedInput schema / properties / board / description

Added value: +"Board ID or name (needed for sequential ID or name lookup)"

addedInput schema / properties / card / description

Added value: +"Card ID, sequential ID (#123), or name"

addedInput schema / properties / custom_fields / description

Added value: +"List of custom field updates. Each dict should contain\n'customFieldId' and the appropriate value field for the field type:\n- Text: {'customFieldId': '...', 'value': 'text'}\n- Number/Rating: {'customFieldId': '...', 'total': 5}\n- Link: {'customFieldId': '...', 'link': {'url': '...', 'text': '...'}}\n- Checkbox: {'customFieldId': '...', 'value': True}\n- Date: {'customFieldId': '...', 'value': '2024-01-15'}\n- Status: {'customFieldId': '...', 'value': ['itemId1', 'itemId2']}"

addedInput schema / properties / description / description

Added value: +"New 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 the add_tasklist and add_task\nparameters instead."

addedInput schema / properties / name / description
```
Added value: +"New card name"
```

addedInput schema / properties / tasks / description

Added value: +"List of task updates. Each dict should contain 'task_id' and optionally\n'completed' (bool) or 'name' (str) to update"

First observedv0.5.0Feb 5, 2026

TDQS

C2.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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. 'Update' implies mutation, but it says nothing about permissions, reversibility, whether omitted fields are left unchanged, or how archiving via the 'archived' param behaves.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The single sentence is front-loaded and waste-free, but for a 10-parameter mutation tool it is under-specified rather than genuinely concise. It earns its place but adds little value to the agent.

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?

Given a 10-parameter tool with no annotations, the description is far too thin; even though an output schema exists (so return values need not be explained), the absence of any behavioral or usage context leaves the agent relying entirely on the schema.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, which already documents card identity, lane moves, tasks, tasklists, archiving, markdown restrictions, and custom field payload shapes in detail.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a generic verb+resource ('Update a card's properties'), which tells the agent it mutates a card. However, 'properties' is broad and gives no hint that this tool also handles lane moves, task/tasklist edits, archiving, and custom fields, nor how it differs from siblings like move_card, assign_card, and tag_card.

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 create_card, move_card, assign_card, or tag_card, and no prerequisites or exclusions are stated. The agent must infer routing purely from the name.

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