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, 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

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only supply generic hints (readOnly=false, idempotent=false, etc.), so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses create semantics, top-level versus nested creation, team-scoping constraints, and the negative-space routing behavior, adding meaningful context beyond the annotations. No contradiction exists.

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?

The description is dense but efficiently organized: it front-loads the purpose, then groups parameters by required/optional, explains nesting and team scope, and ends with a useful next-step pointer. Every sentence contributes practical information without filler.

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 no output schema, the description does not mention the return value, which is a minor gap. However, it fully covers invocation requirements: required name, optional fields, top-level/null semantics, team/parent constraint, and a follow-up action. This is enough for correct selection and calling.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description mostly restates what the schema already says for name, description, negative_space, parent_id, and team_id. It adds a little framing around negative_space and same-team parent_id, but doesn't substantially enhance the parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 'Create a new container (folder) for organizing notes,' a specific verb and resource that clearly distinguishes it from siblings like containers-update, containers-delete, and containers-list. It also points to instructions-update as a related follow-up, further differentiating it from other tools.

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 clearly states when to use the tool—to create a new container—and describes required versus optional inputs, personal versus team scope, and the parent_id same-team constraint. It does not explicitly say 'use containers-update for existing containers,' but the create-only context is unambiguous enough for an agent to select appropriately.

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
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