lightbulb-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

notion_get_block

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a Notion block's content and details through an authenticated connector, enabling read-only access to specific page or block data.

Instructions

Notion connector operation get_block (platform tool notion.get_block).

Routes only through the exact project/account governed connector authority.

Args: arguments: JSON string of arguments for the connector operation. project_id: Authenticated Project UUID. project_ref: Exact project correlation reference. connector_account_ref: Project-bound connector account alias. idempotency_key: Stable business-action identity. effect: Required and must be read; Spring verifies it. approval_ref: Approved platform task UUID when resuming a write.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`effect`	Yes
`arguments`	No	{}
`project_id`	No
`project_ref`	No
`approval_ref`	No
`idempotency_key`	No
`connector_account_ref`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed7 schema fields changedv0.1.1Sep 7, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / approval_ref

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Approval Ref"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / connector_account_ref

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Connector Account Ref"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / effect

Added value: +{
+  "const": "read",
+  "title": "Effect",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / idempotency_key

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Idempotency Key"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / project_id

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Project Id"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / project_ref

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Project Ref"
+}

addedInput schema / required
```
Added value: +[
+  "effect"
+]
```

First observedv0.1.0Jun 25, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already provide the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false). The description adds useful context about the governance routing requirement and that 'effect' must be 'read' with Spring verification. However, it does not disclose much beyond this, and the mention of approval_ref for 'resuming a write' is slightly confusing for a read-only 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 compact and well-structured: an operation identifier line, one routing constraint, and a 7-line argument list. There is minimal fluff, though the first line is somewhat redundant with the tool name. Overall, it earns its place without excessive length.

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?

The description is incomplete for correct invocation. It does not document the actual Notion get_block argument schema (e.g., block_id), provide an example, or clarify how this differs from related notion_get_* tools. The output schema covers return values, but the missing payload details means an agent could easily construct invalid arguments.

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?

Given 0% schema description coverage, the description does provide short definitions for all 7 parameters, which is helpful for the routing fields. However, the central 'arguments' parameter is only described as 'JSON string of arguments for the connector operation' without specifying the required block_id or expected JSON shape, leaving the most important invocation detail underspecified.

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?

The description names the operation ('Notion connector operation get_block') and gives the platform tool identifier, but it never states in plain language that this tool retrieves a Notion block. The verb 'get' and the resource 'block' are implied by the name, yet the description itself is mostly a restatement of the tool name without explicitly describing the operation's behavior or output.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as notion_get_page, notion_list_block_children, or notion_delete_block. The sentence about routing through the governed connector authority is a constraint, not usage guidance, and no when/when-not conditions or alternative tools are mentioned.

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

Deploy Server