slug: miro
provider: Miro
generated_by: planning/capability-mapping/scripts/classify_capabilities.py
model: claude-opus-5
frame:
- Software & Technology
min_confidence: 0.7
capability_model:
  source: https://github.com/vincentmakes/turbo-ea-capabilities
  license: CC-BY-4.0
  attribution: Turbo EA Capabilities by Vincent Verdet — Turbo EA, https://github.com/vincentmakes/turbo-ea-capabilities,
    CC BY 4.0
  notice: NOTICE
edge_count: 2
edges:
- tag: Legal holds
  spec_file: miro-legal-holds-api-openapi.yml
  capability_id: BC-150.20
  capability_id_l1: BC-150
  capability_name: Litigation & Dispute Management
  confidence: 0.75
  evidence: POST /v2/orgs/{org_id}/cases/{case_id}/legal-holds  Create legal hold; GET .../legal-holds/{legal_hold_id}/content-items  Get
    content items under legal hold
  reason: Operations manage litigation cases and legal holds preserving content for eDiscovery, including
    export jobs — this is litigation/dispute support (legal hold and eDiscovery). BC-150.20 fits best;
    some ambiguity vs BC-150.50 Legal Operations.
- tag: User
  spec_file: miro-user-api-openapi.yml
  capability_id: BC-620.20
  capability_id_l1: BC-620
  capability_name: Identity & Access Management
  confidence: 0.7
  evidence: GET /Users listUsers; POST /Users createUser; DELETE /Users/{id} deleteUser (SCIM UserResource,
    PatchUserResource)
  reason: SCIM-style user provisioning endpoints (create/replace/patch/delete users) realise identity
    and access administration — joiner-mover-leaver account lifecycle. Some ambiguity between generic
    IAM and tenant identity federation, hence moderate confidence.