A
licenseA
qualityD
maintenanceA simple note-taking MCP server for recording and managing notes with AI models.
4
6 npm
36
GPL 2.0
python-mcp-server
by Potato-29
Click on "Deploy Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type
@followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@python-mcp-serverAdd a note about today's meeting notes."
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
python-mcp-server MCP server
A MCP server project
Components
Resources
The server implements a simple note storage system with:
Custom note:// URI scheme for accessing individual notes
Each note resource has a name, description and text/plain mimetype
Prompts
The server provides a single prompt:
summarize-notes: Creates summaries of all stored notes
Optional "style" argument to control detail level (brief/detailed)
Generates prompt combining all current notes with style preference
Tools
The server implements one tool:
add-note: Adds a new note to the server
Takes "name" and "content" as required string arguments
Updates server state and notifies clients of resource changes
Related MCP server: Beeper MCP Note Server
Configuration
[TODO: Add configuration details specific to your implementation]
Quickstart
Install
Claude Desktop
On MacOS: ~/Library/Application\ Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json
On Windows: %APPDATA%/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json
Development
Building and Publishing
To prepare the package for distribution:
Sync dependencies and update lockfile:
uv syncBuild package distributions:
uv buildThis will create source and wheel distributions in the dist/ directory.
Publish to PyPI:
uv publishNote: You'll need to set PyPI credentials via environment variables or command flags:
Token:
--tokenorUV_PUBLISH_TOKENOr username/password:
--username/UV_PUBLISH_USERNAMEand--password/UV_PUBLISH_PASSWORD
Debugging
Since MCP servers run over stdio, debugging can be challenging. For the best debugging experience, we strongly recommend using the MCP Inspector.
You can launch the MCP Inspector via npm with this command:
npx @modelcontextprotocol/inspector uv --directory C:\Prayas\Personal\Projects\python-mcp-server run python-mcp-serverUpon launching, the Inspector will display a URL that you can access in your browser to begin debugging.
Available Tools
2 toolsadd-noteC
Add a new note
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | ||
| content | Yes |
TDQS
C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Add a new note' and provides no details on side effects, permissions, return values, or error behavior.
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 a single short sentence with no wasted words, making it concise and front-loaded. However, it is under-specified for the tool's complexity, though this is largely a completeness issue rather than a conciseness issue.
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 lack of annotations, output schema, and parameter descriptions, a five-word description is insufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly. The meaning of the parameters and expected return behavior remain ambiguous.
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?
The input schema has zero description coverage for the two required parameters ('name' and 'content'), and the description does not explain their meaning or format. The agent cannot infer what 'name' or 'content' represent.
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') and a specific resource ('note'), clearly stating the tool's function. It differentiates itself from the sibling 'get_report', which is a read operation.
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. The description only states the action without any context about when to invoke it or when to choose a sibling tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
createEventC
Create a new Google Calendar event
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| summary | Yes | The title/summary of the event | |
| attendees | No | List of attendee email addresses | |
| isFullday | No | Is the event a full day event | |
| description | No | Optional description for the event | |
| endDateTime | Yes | End date and time in ISO format (e.g., '2025-07-10T14:30:00Z') | |
| startDateTime | Yes | Start date and time in ISO format (e.g., '2025-07-10T12:30:00Z') |
TDQS
C2.7/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided. Description lacks any behavioral disclosure such as authentication requirements, rate limits, side effects, or success/failure behavior for a creation 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?
Single sentence with no waste. It is front-loaded with the action. Could include more context but remains appropriately concise for a simple tool.
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?
No output schema, yet the description does not mention return values, event confirmation, or any post-creation behavior. Incomplete for a creation tool with 6 parameters and no annotations.
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 coverage is 100%, with all 6 parameters described in the input schema. However, the description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, staying at the baseline.
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?
Description clearly states 'Create a new Google Calendar event', which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes from the sibling 'add-note' tool, though not explicitly.
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 on when to use or not use this tool. No mention of prerequisites, restrictions, or comparisons with alternatives like 'add-note'.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
2 tool updates
v0.1.0- First observed
add-note - First observed
createEvent
TDQS
C2.7/5.0
Scored across 2 tools
Disambiguation5/5
The two tools serve completely different domains: notes and calendar events. There is no overlap or confusion possible.
Naming Consistency2/5
Tool names use inconsistent conventions: 'add-note' uses snake_case with hyphen, while 'createEvent' uses camelCase. No consistent pattern.
Tool Count2/5
With only two tools, the server feels underdeveloped for a generic Python MCP server. A more complete set would have at least 5-10 tools to justify its name.
Completeness2/5
The server covers only a single operation each for notes and events. Missing essential operations like list, delete, or update for both domains, leaving significant gaps.
Maintenance
ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues
Related MCP Connectors
Google Keep-style notes app with an MCP server for AI agents to read/write notes.
An MCP server that used to create notes
Markdown-based note-taking with a hosted MCP server. Your notes serve you and your AI.
Related MCP Servers
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA simple MCP server for creating and managing notes with support for summarization functionality.1-
- FlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceA simple note-taking MCP server that stores notes and can generate summaries of stored content.4-
- FlicenseCqualityDmaintenanceA simple MCP server that implements a note storage system with RAG capabilities, allowing users to store notes and generate summaries of stored content.3-