anki-mcp-server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Find notes

anki_find_notes

Read-only

Find Anki notes with syntax such as deck:"Spanish" or tag:verbs; returns note IDs, types, decks, tags, and fields for targeted review or editing.

Instructions

Search notes with Anki search syntax, e.g. 'deck:"Spanish"', 'tag:verbs', 'Front:hola', 'added:1', 'is:due'. Returns each note's id, note type, deck(s), tags and fields.

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "anki_find_notes"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`query`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Nov 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered; the description adds value by disclosing the per-note payload (id, note type, deck(s), tags, fields). It stays silent on result caps and ordering, which is the one behavioral trait an agent still has to guess at.

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?

Two compact sentences, front-loaded with the query dialect before the return shape. No filler, no restatement 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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be spelled out and the brief mention is a bonus rather than a necessity. For a two-parameter query tool the definition is nearly complete; only the limit/truncation behavior is missing.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the load: it does an excellent job with `query` by enumerating valid Anki search operators. But `limit` is never mentioned, leaving the default of 50 and the resulting truncation of large result sets completely undisclosed.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Search notes") plus the exact query dialect, and the returned fields. An agent can tell instantly this is the read/lookup path for notes, distinct from anki_add_notes, anki_update_notes, anki_move_notes and anki_delete_notes.

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 syntax examples (deck:, tag:, Front:*hola*, added:1, is:due) give concrete context for when this tool applies and how to phrase a query. However, it never states exclusions or alternatives — e.g. that anki_list_tags is the cheaper path for tag-only lookups, or anki_open_browser for interactive browsing.

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

Deploy Server