Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

WhyVault

by io.whyvault
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Append to note

append_to_note

Add text to the end of a note, or to the end of a section under a heading. The safest way to add information – nothing existing is changed.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "path": "<path>",
      "text": "<text>",
      "change_summary": "<change_summary>"
    },
    "name": "append_to_note"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes
textYesMarkdown to add.
headingNoSection heading text, e.g. „Zeitleiste“, „## Zeitleiste“ or „Projekte > Ziele“. Omit to append at the end.
change_summaryYesOne short line for the user's history, e.g. „Protokoll vom Kundentermin ergänzt“.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

No schema history has been recorded yet.

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=false and readOnlyHint=false; the description reinforces this with 'nothing existing is changed', which is useful corroboration. However it omits behavioral details an agent would want: what happens if the path or heading is missing, whether the note is created, and why change_summary is mandatory for a supposedly non-mutating-of-content operation.

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, front-loaded with the action and immediately followed by the safety framing. No filler, though the em-dash clause is somewhat promotional rather than informative.

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?

For a 4-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the core operation and its safety profile but leaves gaps around path semantics, heading resolution failure, and what the mandatory change_summary implies about side effects. Adequate but not complete.

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 75%, so the schema already explains text, heading and change_summary; baseline is 3. The description adds meaning for the heading parameter by framing it as section-scoped appending, but says nothing about the undocumented path parameter (vault path format) or how heading matching works.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource (add text to the end of a note) plus the section-scoped variant via a heading. It implicitly distinguishes itself from replace_note/update_section by claiming nothing existing is changed, but it never names those siblings, so differentiation is left to inference.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by 'the safest way to add information', which suggests preferring this over rewriting tools when only adding content. There is no explicit when-not guidance and no named alternative for cases where the note or heading does not yet exist.

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

All WhyVault 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