OrgLines

Create note

create_note

Create a personal note in the caller's active workspace, attributed to them. Use to capture a thought/draft/idea. Additive and low-risk. Provide at least one of: title | body. CONFIRMATION: this tool runs immediately when the caller asks for it — it writes only their own record, and they can undo it from this same surface, so the request is taken as the instruction. You get an ordinary result, not a plan_token. Everything destructive, outbound or financial still proposes and waits.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

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

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`body`	No
`tags`	No
`title`	No
`folder`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, it discloses that the write is additive and low-risk, touches only the caller's own record, is undoable from the same surface, and returns an ordinary result rather than a plan_token. That is exactly the kind of execution-model detail annotations cannot convey.

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?

Purpose and constraint are front-loaded in the first two sentences, and the confirmation paragraph is placed after the core behavior. The trailing sentence about destructive/outbound/financial tools is platform-level boilerplate rather than tool-specific information, which slightly dilutes an otherwise tight definition.

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 four-parameter create tool with no output schema, the definition covers the critical unknowns: execution without a confirmation round-trip, blast radius, and reversibility. The remaining gap is input-level detail for tags and folder, which is the only thing an agent could still get wrong.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description has to carry the load: it contributes the meaningful constraint "Provide at least one of: title | body", which the schema does not encode since no fields are required. However, it says nothing about the tags or folder parameters, leaving half the inputs unexplained anywhere.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ("Create a personal note") plus scope ("in the caller's active workspace, attributed to them"), which distinguishes it from meeting-scoped or lead-scoped note tools by the word "personal". It does not explicitly name a sibling to redirect to, so it falls just short of a 5.

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?

"Use to capture a thought/draft/idea" tells the agent the intended trigger, and the confirmation paragraph clarifies when the tool should fire immediately versus wait. There is no explicit when-not or named alternative (e.g. for meeting notes or lead notes), so the routing guidance is contextual rather than exhaustive.

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

All OrgLines 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?