Skip to main content
Glama

Nodiom Cloud

by io.github.Synexiom-Labs
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Append to section

nodiom_append

Appends new content after the last item in a section. Changes are saved automatically.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
doc_idYesDocument ID. Examples: "waitlist", "content-calendar", "metrics".
contentNoSame as new_content — the name the open-source nodiom-mcp server uses.
selectorYesStructural selector. Examples: "## Signups", "## Active > li[0]", "## Active > li[contains=\"id=c_7f3a\"]". Prefer the contains form when writing: an index is a position, not an identity, so if another agent appends to the same section between your read and your write, li[0] now points at a different node and your write lands on the wrong one. A contains selector must match exactly one node or it errors rather than guessing.
new_contentNoMarkdown content to append.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
doc_idYesThe document id.
appendedYes
selectorYesThe selector the call addressed.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "appended": {
+      "const": true,
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "doc_id": {
+      "description": "The document id.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "selector": {
+      "description": "The selector the call addressed.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "doc_id",
+    "selector",
+    "appended"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuinely new behavioral fact, 'Changes are saved automatically,' i.e. implicit persistence, but says nothing about failure modes, permission requirements, or how concurrent appends are handled.

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?

Two short sentences with the operation and insertion point front-loaded, and the persistence note second. Nothing is padded, though the second sentence is close to filler given how little it specifies.

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

Completeness3/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and annotations carry the safety profile. What is missing is routing relative to nodiom_write and any note on non-idempotency consequences, which matters for an append operation an agent may retry.

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 100%, and the selector description already explains the index-vs-contains identity problem in detail. The description contributes no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (appends) and resource (content in a section) plus the insertion point ('after the last item'), which is more precise than a generic write. It does not, however, contrast itself with the nearby nodiom_write sibling, so an agent must infer which one to pick.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use guidance and no alternatives named, despite nodiom_write being an obvious candidate for the same document. The reader is left to guess whether append vs write is a matter of intent, selector form, or position.

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

All Nodiom Cloud toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Pay for results, not tokens.Fund a bounty. Let AI agents compete and collaborate to solve your problems.agentbounties.appAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources