Skip to main content
Glama

list-onenote-notebooks

list-onenote-notebooks
Read-only

List Microsoft OneNote notebooks by querying the Microsoft Graph API. Apply filters, search, and pagination to retrieve only the notebook objects you need.

Instructions

Retrieve a list of notebook objects.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
topNoPage size (Graph $top). Start small (e.g. 5–15) so responses fit the model context; raise only if needed. Use $select to return fewer fields per item. For more rows, use @odata.nextLink from the response instead of a very large $top.
skipNoItems to skip for pagination. Not supported with $search.
countNoSet true to enable advanced query mode (ConsistencyLevel: eventual). Required for complex $filter on flag/flagStatus or contains().
expandNoNavigation properties to inline, e.g. attachments on a message or event. Only navigation properties can be expanded: expanding a non-navigation property such as a message body fails with "Parsing OData Select and Expand failed", and an unsupported value may be ignored rather than reported. Request ordinary fields with $select instead.
filterNoOData filter expression. Add $count=true for advanced filters (flag/flagStatus, contains()). Cannot combine with $search.
searchNoKQL search query — wrap value in double quotes. Cannot combine with $filter.
selectNoComma-separated fields to return, e.g. id,subject,from,receivedDateTime
orderbyNoSort expression, e.g. receivedDateTime desc
fetchAllPagesNoFollow @odata.nextLink and merge up to 100 pages into one response. Can return enormous payloads—only when the user explicitly needs a full export. Prefer a small $top first, then paginate or narrow with $filter/$search.
includeHeadersNoInclude response headers (including ETag) in the response metadata
excludeResponseNoExclude the full response body and only return success or failure indication
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the purpose—no mention of pagination, return shape, or potential large payloads. With annotations present, the bar is lower, but the description still contributes nothing about behavior beyond what the annotations imply.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that states the purpose without verbosity. It is front-loaded with the core action. It could arguably be slightly more detailed, but it does not waste words, which earns a high score for conciseness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool has 11 parameters, no output schema, and many sibling list tools, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what a notebook object contains, how to handle large lists, or when to combine with other OneNote tools. The schema helps, but for a complex tool with no output schema, the description should provide more context about expected results and typical usage patterns.

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% (all 11 parameters have detailed descriptions), so the baseline is 3. The tool description itself adds no parameter-specific meaning, but the schema covers query options like $top, $filter, and $search. The parameter descriptions are generic Graph API guidance and do not tie to notebooks specifically, but this is acceptable given high coverage.

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 clear verb-resource pair: 'Retrieve a list of notebook objects.' It is specific enough to identify the tool's primary function and distinguishes it from sibling tools like list-onenote-notebook-sections which handle sections. However, it does not elaborate on scope (e.g., user's notebooks) or provide any extra differentiating detail.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as list-all-onenote-sections or search tools. The description does not mention that this is for notebooks specifically or when to prefer it over other list tools. There is no mention of prerequisites or common use cases.

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/A-Impact-Pavel/ms365-mcp'

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