Markdown by mdedit.ai

Create a Markdown Document

create_article

Create a durable Markdown Document with initial content in an accessible workspace. Omit the workspace selector when the user has only one workspace, or pass workspaceName when they chose one by name.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`title`	Yes
`content`	Yes
`folderId`	No
`workspaceId`	No	Internal workspace identifier when already available. Omit it when the user referred to a workspace by name or has only one workspace.
`collaborative`	No
`workspaceName`	No	Human-visible workspace name. Prefer this over asking the user for an internal workspace identifier.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`title`	Yes
`content`	Yes
`articleId`	Yes
`editorUrl`	Yes
`contentHash`	Yes
`workspaceId`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

First observedAug 28, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already signal a non-read-only, non-idempotent mutation, and the description's 'durable' adds useful context that the document persists after creation. It doesn't disclose duplicate-title handling, required permissions, or whether creation implies publication (publish_article is a separate sibling), but with a full annotation set the burden on the description is lower.

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?

Two sentences with no filler: the first delivers the core purpose and the second delivers the highest-value conditional guidance. Every sentence earns its place, and the action is front-loaded.

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?

With an output schema present and a full annotation set, the description covers the essential creation semantics and the workspace decision rule. Minor gaps remain: no mention of the create-vs-publish relationship and no guidance on folderId or collaborative, but nothing blocks correct invocation for the common path.

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 only 33%, so the description must compensate. It does add the crucial disambiguation for workspaceName vs workspaceId vs omitting the selector. However, folderId and collaborative have no schema or description-level explanation, leaving two parameters under-documented.

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?

States a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('durable Markdown Document with initial content'), clearly separating it from edit_article, publish_article, and read_article siblings. The 'durable' qualifier also distinguishes persistent document creation from ephemeral review artifacts like suggestions and comments.

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?

Provides explicit conditional guidance on workspace selection: omit the selector for single-workspace users and pass workspaceName when the user named a workspace. It does not explicitly name when-not-to-use alternatives (e.g., edit_article for modifications), so it falls short of full alternative routing.

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

All Markdown by mdedit.ai tools Inspect

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

A3.6/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes across article CRUD, review workflows, publishing, and conversion/export. Minor confusion can arise between convert_document and start_article_export (and their corresponding status checkers), but the descriptions explicitly differentiate arbitrary content conversion from exporting stored documents. The render_article tool's broad contextual wording overlaps conceptually with several actions, though its actual function (opening the reader) is unique.

Naming Consistency5/5

All 22 tool names follow a strict snake_case verb_noun pattern, such as list_articles, accept_suggestion, start_article_export, and unpublish_article. There are no mixed conventions, vague verbs, or camelCase outliers, making the naming highly predictable.

Tool Count3/5

At 22 tools, the server sits above the ideal 3-15 range and feels somewhat heavy for an MCP surface. The inclusion of record_article_app_event, a component-only telemetry tool with no agent-facing value, adds to this heaviness. However, the breadth of the domain—documents, collaboration, publishing, and conversion—largely justifies the count.

Completeness3/5

The tool surface covers article lifecycle, review threads, publishing, export/conversion, and presence well, covering most common workflows. A notable gap is the lack of any delete_article or trash operation, leaving no way to remove documents. Additionally, updates are limited to anchored edits via edit_article, with no direct full-content replacement option.

Resources

Need Help?