Skip to main content
Glama

Mob (Demo)

by io.github.benkaiser

note_manage

Create, update, delete, or restore a note for a contact. • action="create": Add a new note. Requires contact_id and body. Optional title, is_pinned. • action="update": Update an existing note. Requires id. Optional title, body, is_pinned. • action="delete": Soft-delete a note. Requires id. • action="restore": Restore a soft-deleted note. Requires id.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoThe note ID (required for "update", "delete", "restore")
bodyNoNote body, supports markdown (required for "create", optional for "update")
titleNoNote title (optional for "create" and "update")
actionYesAction to perform
is_pinnedNoPin/unpin note (optional for "create" and "update")
contact_idNoThe contact ID (required for "create")

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses important behavior such as 'soft-delete' and the restore capability, which is useful. However, it does not describe return values, error handling, or side effects beyond the action semantics, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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 concise and well-structured with a leading summary followed by a bullet list for each action. Every sentence provides essential information, and the format makes it easy to parse.

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?

Given the multi-action complexity and lack of annotations/output schema, the description covers the essential usage guidance for all four actions, including parameter dependencies. It omits some details like return values or error responses, but the core operational context is sufficiently complete for correct tool invocation.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explicitly mapping each action to required and optional parameters (e.g., create requires contact_id and body), which is more actionable than the schema's individual parameter descriptions alone.

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 clearly states 'Create, update, delete, or restore a note for a contact,' using a specific verb and resource. It enumerates all four actions, distinguishing it from sibling tools like note_list.

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?

The description provides clear per-action usage instructions, noting which parameters are required and optional for each action. It does not explicitly mention when to use alternatives like note_list, but the action-oriented bullets give unambiguous context for when to invoke this tool.

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

All Mob (Demo) toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools are clearly distinct by entity, but contact_get and contact_timeline overlap significantly, and debt_manage's action='list' duplicates what other entities do with a dedicated list tool. Descriptions are detailed enough to resolve most ambiguity, though.

Naming Consistency3/5

Tool names are mostly snake_case and readable, but they mix conventions: noun_verb (contact_create), verb_noun (batch_create_activities), and descriptive phrases (contacts_needing_attention). The noun_manage pattern is dominant, but the lack of uniformity makes the naming less predictable.

Tool Count2/5

With 42 tools, the surface is very large, even for a full-featured CRM. Many tools bundle multiple actions, but the sheer number forces an agent to consider many options, increasing selection difficulty and cognitive load.

Completeness5/5

The server provides comprehensive CRM coverage: contacts, activities, notes, tasks, reminders, gifts, debts, relationships, tags, custom fields, notifications, settings, and exports. It supports batch operations, duplicate detection, merge, and special queries, leaving few if any obvious gaps.

Resources