nextcloud-agent

Create note

nextcloud_create_note

Create a single Nextcloud note with a title and optional content or category to capture information directly in your notes.

Instructions

Create one note.

POST /index.php/apps/notes/api/v1/notes

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": {
      "title": "<title>"
    },
    "name": "nextcloud_create_note"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`title`	Yes
`content`	No
`category`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv3.0.0Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

C2.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond a raw endpoint path: it does not say what happens on duplicate titles, whether the call returns the new note's id, or how auth/permissions are handled for a non-idempotent write.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

It is front-loaded and free of padding, which is good, but the brevity comes at the cost of under-specification rather than economy. The raw HTTP endpoint line adds little an agent can act on compared to the missing parameter information.

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?

For a non-idempotent write tool with three undocumented parameters, no output schema, and no explanation of the returned value, the description is far too thin. An agent gets no information about the shape of the payload it must construct beyond the schema's types.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the input schema documents none of the three parameters (title, content, category) beyond type and defaults. The description does not mention any of them, leaving the agent with no guidance on what a note body looks like or what category values are meaningful.

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

Purpose3/5

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

"Create one note" gives a verb and a resource, and the trailing endpoint confirms it targets the Notes app's collection endpoint. However, it is essentially a restatement of the tool title "Create note" and offers no differentiation from siblings such as nextcloud_update_note, nextcloud_delete_note, or nextcloud_list_notes.

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?

Nothing states when this tool should be used instead of the update or list variants, nor any prerequisites (an existing Notes app install, authentication scope). The agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name.

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

Deploy Server