Skip to main content
Glama

Read a note version

get_note_version
Read-onlyIdempotent

Read one earlier version next to the Note's current content and revision, to compare them before quoting it or bringing it back with restore_note_version. Note references in an old version are not followed; read their current targets with get_note.

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": {
      "note_id": "<note_id>",
      "version_id": "<version_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_note_version"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
note_idYesA Note's id, from get_thread, search or get_note.
version_idYesA version's id, from get_note_history.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, and the description adds real value beyond them by explaining that the response pairs the old version with the current content and revision and that it will not resolve embedded references. It does not address size, truncation, or pagination of long version bodies.

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, comparison purpose front-loaded, with the reference-resolution caveat placed after so it does not bury the main point. No filler.

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 simple two-parameter read with no output schema, the description adequately conveys what comes back and how it differs from neighbouring tools. Only the handling of very large versions or truncation is unaddressed.

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 schema already states exactly where each id comes from (get_thread/search/get_note for note_id, get_note_history for version_id), so the description adds no parameter meaning beyond structured data. Baseline 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Read one earlier version') and adds a distinguishing detail, that the version is returned next to the Note's current content and revision, which separates it from get_note, get_note_history, and restore_note_version.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It states a concrete use case (compare before quoting or restoring), names the sibling that performs the follow-up action (restore_note_version), and gives an explicit exclusion: references inside an old version are not followed, so use get_note for current targets.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.