ms-365-mcp-server

create-onenote-notebook

create-onenote-notebook

Destructive

Creates a new OneNote notebook with a unique display name for organizing notes.

Instructions

Create a new OneNote notebook.

💡 TIP: Creates a new OneNote notebook. Body: { displayName: 'Notebook Name' }. The name must be unique across the user's notebooks.

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": {
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "create-onenote-notebook"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`body`	Yes
`confirm`	No	For destructive operations when the confirm gate is enabled (MS365_MCP_REQUIRE_CONFIRM=true; off by default). Set to true only after the user has explicitly approved this action. When the gate is on, calls without confirm: true return { error: "confirmation_required" } without touching user data.
`includeHeaders`	No	Include response headers (including ETag) in the response metadata
`excludeResponse`	No	Exclude the full response body and only return success or failure indication

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.0.0-developmentAug 24, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true) and the description's "create" claim is consistent with them — no contradiction. The description adds the uniqueness constraint and required body shape as useful behavioral context, but contributes little beyond the annotations beyond that.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The purpose is front-loaded and the whole text is short, but the TIP line redundantly restates "Creates a new OneNote notebook" before delivering the body and uniqueness details. The redundancy costs it a higher score.

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 a large nested schema and no output schema, the description is sufficient to invoke the tool correctly (creates a notebook with a displayName), but it omits response expectations, error behavior on name collision, and the confirm-gate semantics that appear in the schema.

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 coverage is 75%, so the schema already documents most parameters including body.displayName. The description adds a helpful shorthand (Body: { displayName: 'Notebook Name' }) that clarifies the single required field, but doesn't go beyond what the schema provides for the rest.

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?

"Create a new OneNote notebook" names a specific verb and resource, making it distinguishable from siblings like create-onenote-page and create-onenote-section. However, the TIP line repeats the same purpose verbatim rather than refining the scope, so it earns points for clarity but not full distinctiveness.

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 gives a practical usage note — the name must be unique across the user's notebooks — which helps the agent avoid a failed call. But it never routes to alternatives (e.g., create-onenote-section for working inside a notebook) nor states when not to use the tool, leaving selection to inference.

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

Deploy Server