Skip to main content
Glama

note_get

Retrieve complete content of project notes by ID to access detailed task information and progress tracking data.

Instructions

PROJECT MANAGEMENT (TPM): Get full content of a specific note by ID.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
note_idYesNote ID

Implementation Reference

  • Handler for note_get tool: retrieves the note from the database using note_id and returns its JSON dump or an error if not found.
    if name == "note_get":
        # Need to add get_note method to db
        note = db.get_note(args["note_id"])
        if not note:
            return f"Note {args['note_id']} not found"
        return _json(note.model_dump())
  • Tool registration for 'note_get' including name, description, and input schema definition.
    Tool(
        name="note_get",
        description="PROJECT MANAGEMENT (TPM): Get full content of a specific note by ID.",
        inputSchema={
            "type": "object",
            "properties": {
                "note_id": {"type": "string", "description": "Note ID"},
            },
            "required": ["note_id"],
        },
    ),
  • Input schema for note_get tool: requires note_id string.
    inputSchema={
        "type": "object",
        "properties": {
            "note_id": {"type": "string", "description": "Note ID"},
        },
        "required": ["note_id"],
    },
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states it's a 'Get' operation, implying read-only behavior, but doesn't specify permissions required, error handling, rate limits, or what 'full content' includes (e.g., text, metadata). This leaves significant gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 front-loaded and concise, using only one sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and context without unnecessary details, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (single parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is adequate but incomplete. It covers the basic purpose but lacks behavioral details (e.g., permissions, error cases) and doesn't explain return values, which is a gap since there's no output schema. This makes it minimally viable but with clear room for improvement.

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?

The description adds minimal value beyond the input schema, which has 100% coverage and clearly documents the 'note_id' parameter. The description mentions 'by ID', reinforcing the schema, but doesn't provide additional context like ID format or examples. With high schema coverage, the baseline is 3.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('full content of a specific note'), and it includes the domain context ('PROJECT MANAGEMENT (TPM)'). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'note_list' or 'task_get', which would require a 5.

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?

The description implies usage by specifying 'by ID' and the domain context, suggesting it's for retrieving individual notes in project management. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'note_list' or 'task_get', and doesn't mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/urjitbhatia/tpm-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server