local-notes-search-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

index_directory

Index a local directory for semantic search. Skips unchanged, oversized, and credential-shaped files, and removes stale entries.

Instructions

Index (or re-index) a local directory for semantic search. Walks recursively, skips .git/node_modules/.venv/etc and files >2MB, and skips any file whose content is unchanged since the last index (cheap: a whole-file hash check before touching the embedding model). Files that were indexed before but no longer exist under path are removed from the index.

Credential-shaped file names (.env, id_rsa, credentials.json, .netrc,
*.pem, ...) are never indexed. If LOCAL_NOTES_SEARCH_ALLOWED_ROOTS is
set, `path` must resolve inside one of its entries; unset (the default)
means any readable directory is indexable.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`path`	Yes
`extensions`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations to lean on, the description fully covers side effects and behaviors: recursive walking, skipped directories and size limits, unchanged-file hashing, stale-entry removal, credential-shaped file exclusions, and the LOCAL_NOTES_SEARCH_ALLOWED_ROOTS constraint. This is exemplary disclosure for a tool with no annotations.

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 dense but every sentence earns its place. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by skip rules, side effects, security exclusions, and configuration constraints. There is no fluff or redundant restating of the tool name.

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

Completeness4/5

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

The description is unusually complete for a complex tool: it covers scope, side effects, security, and environment constraints, and an output schema exists to document return values. The only notable gap is the undocumented `extensions` parameter, which prevents a perfect score.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds useful meaning for `path` (must resolve inside allowed roots, must be readable), but it never mentions the `extensions` parameter at all, leaving its purpose and possible values entirely undocumented.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Index (or re-index) a local directory for semantic search.' It then adds behavioral specifics that distinguish this tool from sibling tools like search_notes and list_indexed_files, making the tool's role unmistakable.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description makes the tool's use case clear: build or refresh a semantic-search index for a local directory. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say 'use search_notes instead for queries,' but the context is unambiguous and no exclusion conditions are omitted.

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

Deploy Server