KnowledgeRail

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

knowledge_page

Destructive

Create, read, edit, move, or delete wiki pages and append durable event logs. Manage project documentation with reliable version tracking and action logging.

Instructions

Page CRUD and durable log.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`path`	No	Wiki .md path; wiki/ maps to root.
`entry`	No
`level`	No		ACTION
`action`	Yes	write=create;edit=replace;move=rename;append_log=event.
`content`	No
`dry_run`	No
`new_path`	No
`old_path`	No
`max_chars`	No
`new_string`	No
`old_string`	No
`replace_all`	No
`resource_uri`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`state`	Yes
`guidance`	No
`nextAction`	Yes
`resultText`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed5 schema fields changedv2.9.0Sep 22, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / action / description

Previous value: -"read=open; write=create; edit=replace; move=rename; delete=remove; append_log=event."New value: +"write=create;edit=replace;move=rename;append_log=event."

removedInput schema / properties / new_path / description
```
Removed value: -"Wiki-relative .md; creates dirs."
```

changedInput schema / properties / path / description

Previous value: -"Wiki .md path; leading wiki/ maps to root."New value: +"Wiki .md path; wiki/ maps to root."

addedInput schema / properties / resource_uri / format
```
Added value: +"starts_with"
```
removedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -true
```

Changed2 schema fields changedv2.7.2Sep 2, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / new_path / description
```
Added value: +"Wiki-relative .md; creates dirs."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / path / description
```
Added value: +"Wiki .md path; leading wiki/ maps to root."
```
First observedv2.7.0Sep 1, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate destructive behavior (destructiveHint=true) and non-read-only. The description adds 'durable log' implying persisted log entries, which is slight additional context beyond annotations. It does not detail what gets destroyed or mention any side effects beyond the basic CRUD implication.

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 concise sentence with no fluff, front-loading the core purpose. It is appropriately terse, though it sacrifices some explanatory power for brevity.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the tool has 13 parameters, many without schema descriptions, and a destructive hint. The description does not cover different actions (read, write, edit, move, delete, append_log) or parameter relationships, making it utterly insufficient for correct invocation in a complex context.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is only 15%, yet the description mentions no parameters or their meanings. It does not compensate for the low schema coverage, leaving most of the 13 parameters unexplained by both the schema and description. The link between 'durable log' and append_log is implicit at best.

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 the tool manages pages via CRUD and maintains a durable log, giving a clear verb+resource pairing. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like knowledge_document or knowledge_files, so it lacks explicit sibling distinction.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of prerequisites, intended use cases, or exclusions. The description only states what it does, not when to choose it.

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

Deploy Server