GameGene

GameGene: 公開ノート1冊

gamegene_notebook

Read-only

公開ノート1冊を本文まで返す。下書きのノートは ID を指定しても返らない — その場合は null が返る (存在しない ID と同じ)。本文が長いと entries を途中で打ち切ることがある — そのとき truncatedByBudget が true になり、nextEntryOffset に続きの位置が入る。続きを読むには、その値を entryOffset にそのまま渡してもう一度呼ぶ。nextEntryOffset が null なら続きは無い。entryCount は entries の返却件数ではなく、そのノートの entries 総数。

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "gamegene_notebook"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`entryOffset`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/non-destructive annotations, it discloses the null-return behavior for drafts and missing IDs, the truncation condition, and the meaning of entryCount versus returned entries — exactly the behavior an agent cannot infer from annotations alone.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then each subsequent sentence covers one distinct behavior — null returns, truncation, continuation, entryCount — with no repeated or filler content.

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?

With no output schema, the description supplies the return-field semantics (entries, truncatedByBudget, nextEntryOffset, entryCount) and pagination protocol, which is everything needed to call and consume this tool correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden; it fully explains entryOffset (feed it nextEntryOffset, stop when null) and implies id semantics via the draft/null rule. The id format itself is left unstated, which is the only real gap.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('公開ノート1冊を本文まで返す') and pins down scope (public only, body included), which cleanly separates it from the list-oriented sibling gamegene_notebooks.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives concrete operational guidance: drafts return null even with a valid ID, and continuation requires passing nextEntryOffset back as entryOffset. It does not explicitly compare against gamegene_notebooks or gamegene_search, so sibling routing is only implicit.

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

All GameGene tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?