Skip to main content
Glama

hjarni

by com.hjarni
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

containers-create

Create a new container (folder) for organizing notes. Required: name (string). Optional: description (string), negative_space (string — what does NOT belong in this folder, so notes can be routed away from it), parent_id (integer or null) for nesting inside another container — null or omitted creates it at the top level (so does the space's root id: the root is not a folder, and the response then reports parent_id null), team_id (integer) to create the container in a team instead of personal space. When team_id is set, parent_id (if provided) must belong to the same team. After creating, consider setting up LLM instructions with instructions-update.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesContainer name (required)
team_idNoCreate container in this team instead of personal space. Omit it (or send null) for personal space.
parent_idNoParent container ID for nesting, or null/omitted for a top-level container. Must belong to the same scope (personal or team) as the new container.
descriptionNoContainer description
negative_spaceNoWhat does NOT belong in this folder (e.g. 'No meeting notes, those go in Meetings'). Helps route notes away from the wrong place.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / team_id / description
      Previous value: -"Create container in this team instead of personal space"New value: +"Create container in this team instead of personal space. Omit it (or send null) for personal space."
    • changedInput schema / properties / team_id / type
      Previous value: -"integer"New value: +[
+  "integer",
+  "null"
+]
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / parent_id / description
      Previous value: -"Parent container ID for nesting. Must belong to the same scope (personal or team) as the new container."New value: +"Parent container ID for nesting, or null/omitted for a top-level container. Must belong to the same scope (personal or team) as the new container."
    • changedInput schema / properties / parent_id / type
      Previous value: -"integer"New value: +[
+  "integer",
+  "null"
+]
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / negative_space
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "What does NOT belong in this folder (e.g. 'No meeting notes, those go in Meetings'). Helps route notes away from the wrong place.",
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}
  4. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / parent_id / description
      Previous value: -"Parent container ID for nesting"New value: +"Parent container ID for nesting. Must belong to the same scope (personal or team) as the new container."
    • addedInput schema / properties / team_id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Create container in this team instead of personal space",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  5. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Previous value: -"Container name"New value: +"Container name (required)"
  6. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false indicates a write operation), the description adds useful behavioral details: it explains that parent_id null or root id results in top-level creation and that the response reports parent_id null, and it clarifies that the root is not a folder. It also states the constraint that team_id and parent_id must belong to the same team. These nuances are not in the annotations and help the agent understand edge cases and response semantics.

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 a single dense paragraph that front-loads the core action and then systematically explains each parameter. While it is longer than strictly necessary, every sentence adds value (e.g., root id nuance, team constraint, follow-up suggestion). It is structured logically from required to optional parameters, and the final recommendation to use instructions-update is a useful pointer.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with five parameters, no output schema, and sparse annotations, the description covers all parameters, explains edge cases (root id, team scoping), and even suggests a follow-up action. It does not explicitly state the return value (e.g., that it returns the created container), but it does mention response behavior for parent_id. Given the lack of an output schema, a note on the return format would improve completeness, but the description is already quite thorough.

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?

The schema already covers all five parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The tool description goes beyond the schema by elaborating on negative_space (what does not belong, how it routes notes) and clarifying parent_id behavior (null/omitted vs root id, response behavior). It also adds the team_id–parent_id constraint that is not present in the schema. These additions meaningfully improve parameter understanding.

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: 'Create a new container (folder) for organizing notes.' It clearly distinguishes the creation action from sibling tools like containers-update or containers-delete by naming the action explicitly. Even without naming alternatives, the purpose is unambiguous and the function of the tool is immediately obvious.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies when to use the tool (when a new container is needed) but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like containers-update or containers-list. It does provide usage context such as team_id constraints and the parent_id nesting logic, which helps guide correct invocation. However, it does not state when NOT to use this tool or name sibling tools explicitly, so it falls short of full guidance.

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

All hjarni toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Context All Your Agents Can ShareAgents share what they learn, hand off work, and hold it when you switch models. Start with 5 GB free.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources