Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
wiznote-mcp

wiznote-mcp

by 735140144
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

wiz_update_note

Update a note in WizNote by replacing its content with new HTML or Markdown.

Instructions

Update an existing note from HTML or Markdown.

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": {
      "docGuid": "<docGuid>",
      "title": "<title>",
      "category": "<category>"
    },
    "name": "wiz_update_note"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
htmlNo
titleYes
kbGuidNo
docGuidYes
categoryYes
markdownNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry behavioral disclosure. It states 'update' but gives no details on mutation effects, required permissions, or side effects. Minimal transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is very short (one sentence) but lacks essential information. Conciseness without completeness is not valuable.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain how to use the tool or what the response contains.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%. The description only hints at 'html' and 'markdown' parameters but does not explain 'title', 'kbGuid', 'docGuid', or 'category'. Most parameters remain undefined.

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 specifies a clear verb 'Update' and resource 'existing note', distinguishing it from create/get/search sibling tools. However, it could be more explicit about the two content sources (HTML or Markdown) being alternative input formats.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like wiz_create_note or wiz_get_note. The description does not mention prerequisites or contexts where update is appropriate.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools