mcp-kaggle-tool

kaggle_create_notebook

Create a Kaggle notebook by providing title, Python or R code, and configure options like privacy, GPU, internet access, and attached datasets.

Instructions

Create a new Kaggle notebook

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>",
      "code": "<code>"
    },
    "name": "kaggle_create_notebook"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`title`	Yes	Notebook title
`code`	Yes	Python code for the notebook
`language`	No	Programming language (python or r)	python
`isPrivate`	No	Make notebook private
`enableGpu`	No	Enable GPU acceleration
`enableInternet`	No	Enable internet access
`datasetSources`	No	Dataset slugs to attach (e.g., ["username/dataset-name"])

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0May 29, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only states 'Create a new Kaggle notebook' but omits critical behavioral details such as what happens after creation, authentication requirements, or side effects.

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?

The description is concise at one sentence, but it is too minimal for a tool with 7 parameters. It could be structured to provide a brief overview of what each parameter achieves.

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 (7 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is severely incomplete. It fails to indicate what the tool returns or how creation is confirmed.

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 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds no extra meaning 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 'Create a new Kaggle notebook' uses a specific verb and resource, and it clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like kaggle_run_notebook (runs an existing notebook) and kaggle_get_notebook_status (checks status).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, or cases where siblings would be more appropriate.

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

Deploy Server