Skip to main content
Glama
valentil

FeatureBoard MCP Server

by valentil
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
JavaScript
Local

Open the board (UI)

get_board
Read-only

Return the FeatureBoard board UI as HTML to view tasks, status, and analytics in a chatbot artifact.

Instructions

Return the FeatureBoard board UI as a self-contained HTML document, ready to render as a Cowork artifact. This is THE way to satisfy any natural-language request to see the board — "open/show the board", "show the featureboard", "what's on my plate", "how are we looking", "give me a status", "show velocity/analytics". Do NOT hand-write your own board: take the returned html, write it to a file, and pass it to create_artifact (use artifact id "featureboard-board"; if a board artifact is already open, reuse it via update_artifact instead of creating a duplicate). Use the mcp_tools array in this response VERBATIM as the artifact's mcp_tools (do not hand-pick tools from memory — the board's buttons and analytics dashboard call back into exactly these tools, and any you omit will fail with "not in this artifact's mcp_tools allowlist").

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Tool Definition Quality

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true; description adds context about HTML output and mcp_tools dependency, but could further clarify no side effects beyond safe read.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Every sentence adds value, but description is relatively long. Could be tightened slightly, but front-loaded with core purpose.

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?

Given no parameters and no output schema, description covers all necessary context: purpose, usage, output handling, artifact lifecycle, and mcp_tools requirement.

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?

No parameters exist, so baseline is 4. Description adds no parameter info, which is acceptable given zero parameters and 100% schema coverage.

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 clearly states it returns the board UI as HTML document, explicitly linking to natural-language requests and distinguishing from sibling tools.

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?

Provides explicit usage examples, tells when to use (any board request) and when not to (hand-writing), and gives step-by-step instructions for output handling and artifact reuse.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/valentil/featureboard-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server