Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
anki-workflow-mcp

anki-workflow-mcp

by Gugart43
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Corpus Load

corpus_load

Save source material into a deck's corpus directory with a descriptive label so it can be triaged later.

Instructions

Persist source material into the deck's corpus directory for later triage.

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": {
      "deck_dir": "<deck_dir>",
      "text": "<text>",
      "label": "<label>"
    },
    "name": "corpus_load"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textYesSource material to save (markdown, plain text, or pasted excerpt).
labelYesDescriptive name for this source (e.g. 'harrison_cap4', 'notebooklm_ep'). Converted automatically to a safe filename.
deck_dirYesAbsolute path to the deck directory (must contain manifesto.json).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that content is written to disk persistently and where, but says nothing about overwrite behavior when a label collides with an existing file, whether the operation is idempotent, or what errors occur if deck_dir lacks manifesto.json. For a write tool with zero annotation coverage this is a meaningful gap.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though the terseness comes at the cost of the behavioral detail noted above.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the schema fully documents the inputs. What remains missing for a persistence/mutation tool with no annotations is collision and overwrite semantics, which leaves the definition only minimally adequate.

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 100% and each of the three parameters has a descriptive string, including the label-to-filename conversion note. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond 'source material', so the baseline 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb (persist) plus a specific target (source material into the deck's corpus directory), which tells an agent exactly what is stored and where. It does not explicitly differentiate against the similarly named sibling catalog_load, so it falls short of 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 phrase 'for later triage' implies this is the ingestion step preceding corpus_triage, giving implicit usage context. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance, no mention of prerequisites beyond the schema's manifesto.json note, and no stated alternative (e.g., catalog_load) for the agent to choose between.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools