Skip to main content
Glama
valentil

FeatureBoard MCP Server

by valentil

Set the project standard (rigor profile)

set_standard
Idempotent

Set and lock a project's work rigor level—prototype, standard, or polished—and optionally include a custom mandate. The locked standard governs work packets and can only be overridden with explicit force.

Instructions

Set — and LOCK — how much rigor a project's work is held to. Levels: "prototype" (move fast, minimal ceremony), "standard" (normal professional loop), "polished" (research-first: competitor teardowns, layout/IA of comparable apps, white papers, UX/UI heuristics, automation-everywhere, high test rigor + self-review). The resolved standard is injected into every work packet (packet.standard + extra definition-of-done items) and bends research-on-intake (polished forces it on with expanded questions; prototype skips it). mandate is the project's own free-text bar, carried verbatim into packets. INFERENCE RULE: when a project's standard is unset/unlocked, infer the level from the user's cues ONCE (pass source:"inferred") and lock it. A locked standard is settled — this tool refuses to change it unless force:true, which you pass ONLY when the user explicitly asks to change the standard. Account-wide default for unset projects: set_global_config defaultStandard.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
forceNoOverride a LOCKED standard. Pass ONLY when the user explicitly asked to change it.
levelYes
sourceNoWho decided: the user explicitly (default), or inferred once from conversation cues.
mandateNoProject-specific bar in the user's words, e.g. 'research competitors + whitepapers + UX guides; automate everywhere; highly polished engineering standard'.
projectYes
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations indicate idempotentHint: true and destructiveHint: false, implying non-destructive idempotent behavior. The description goes far beyond by disclosing locking semantics, refusal to change without force, injection into work packets, and effects on research-on-intake. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

The description is detailed but well-organized, front-loading the core action. It includes necessary inference rules and locking behavior. Slightly verbose but earns its length due to complexity.

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 the tool's complexity (5 parameters, locking, inference, side effects on packets and research), the description covers all essential aspects. It explains output behavior (injection into packets) and references global defaults, ensuring an agent can correctly invoke it without external knowledge.

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

Parameters5/5

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

The input schema has 60% description coverage (force, source, mandate have descriptions; level and project lack them). The description compensates by explaining level values in detail (effect on ceremony, research, rigor) and clarifying mandate as free-text bar. It adds meaning beyond schema, especially for the enum parameters.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: to set and lock the rigor level of a project. It enumerates three levels ('prototype', 'standard', 'polished') with behavioral implications, distinguishing itself from other project settings tools like 'steer_project' or 'set_project_config' by emphasizing locking and inference rules.

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 guidance on when to use the tool (set the standard), when not to (when locked without force), and how to handle inference (infer once and lock). It also mentions account-wide default via set_global_config, offering complete usage context.

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