Skip to main content
Glama
JonEricDelaCruz

onenote-mcp

by JonEricDelaCruz
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Append to page

appendToPage

Add content to an existing OneNote page at the beginning or end without overwriting existing notes.

Instructions

Add content to the end (or start) of an existing page without replacing it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageYesPage TITLE (e.g. "AI Search") or ID. Titles are matched case-insensitively; if several pages share one you get the list back to choose from. You do NOT need to look up an ID first.
isHtmlNo
contentYesContent to add. Plain text unless isHtml is true.
positionNoWhere to insert relative to existing body content. Defaults to append.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv2.1.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / page
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Page TITLE (e.g. \"AI Search\") or ID. Titles are matched case-insensitively; if several pages share one you get the list back to choose from. You do NOT need to look up an ID first.",
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / pageId
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Page ID from listPages or searchPages.",
-  "minLength": 1,
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "pageId",
-  "content"
-]New value: +[
+  "page",
+  "content"
+]
  2. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already convey non-read-only and non-destructive behavior; the description adds the useful 'without replacing it' qualifier but does not address what happens when the page does not exist, duplicate titles, or any external side effects. With openWorldHint=true, some world-modifying context is already implied by annotations, so the description carries only modest additional burden.

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?

One front-loaded sentence captures the core operation, positional flexibility, and non-destructive guarantee without any filler. Every phrase earns its place.

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?

For a four-parameter append tool with a detailed schema and safety annotations, the description is largely complete: an agent knows the operation, the target, and the placement options. The only notable omissions are the outcome/return value and error behavior (e.g., missing page), which are not covered by an output 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?

The schema already documents page, content, and position with usable descriptions; the description's 'end (or start)' simply echoes position's enum. It adds no additional meaning for isHtml, the one parameter without a schema description, so it neither compensates for that gap nor goes beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('add content'), a clear resource ('existing page'), and a positional qualifier ('end (or start)'), which distinguishes it from createPage and deletePage. The phrase 'without replacing it' reinforces the append semantics so an agent can immediately tell this is a mutation of existing content, not a page-creation or deletion tool.

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 phrase 'existing page' makes clear this is for pages that already exist, and 'without replacing it' rules out replacement workflows. It does not explicitly name alternatives such as createPage for new pages, so it stops short of a full 5, but the context is unambiguous enough for an agent to route correctly.

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