Skip to main content
Glama

query_notes

Query notes across projects and folders with text search, regex patterns, and date filters. Filter by project or folder scope to find specific notes.

Instructions

Query notes with folder/project scope and grep-like content search.

[Category: Query & Search]  [Auth: V1 + V2]
[Related: query_tasks, workspace_map, get_project_tasks]
Multi-value filters accept either a list or a single string.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idsNo
project_namesNo
folder_idsNo
folder_namesNo
text_queryNo
keyword_modeNoany
regexNo
exclude_regexNo
search_fieldsNo
created_fromNo
created_toNo
modified_fromNo
modified_toNo
limitNo
sort_byNomodifiedTime
descendingNo
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'grep-like content search' and the auth tags, but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, or any side effects. The description adds some context but is not comprehensive for a query tool.

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 concise with two sentences plus a structured line for category/auth/related. It is front-loaded and efficient, though it could be slightly improved with bullet points for the related tools hint.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (16 parameters, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on return format, pagination, sorting, date filters, and other behaviors, leaving the agent with insufficient context for effective use.

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 only notes that multi-value filters accept list/string, which applies to some parameters, but fails to explain the rest of the 16 parameters. This is insufficient for understanding the parameter purposes.

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 clearly states 'Query notes with folder/project scope and grep-like content search', identifying the tool's function and resource. It also lists related tools, but does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like query_tasks, leaving some ambiguity.

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 description provides a usage hint about multi-value filters accepting list or string, and lists related tools. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and does not mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/KpihX/tick-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server