Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
anki-connect-mcp

anki-connect-mcp

by SolarianGG
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

editors.openAdd

editors_openAdd

Opens or activates Anki's Add editor and optionally prefills a draft note's note type, deck, fields, and tags so you can start creating a new note.

Instructions

Open or activate the configured Add editor and optionally populate a draft.

Use the active legacy/Svelte variant. Do not run duplicate/empty-field eligibility checks on an unfinished draft. Return noteId=null until persisted; do not claim ID 0 identifies a future note.

Anki-Connect method editors.openAdd. Scope: collection. Effect: gui. Completion: operation. Undo: none.

Long-running operation: by default the server waits for the final result (see waitForCompletion / timeoutSeconds).

Possible errors: collectionUnavailable, editorConflict, internalError, invalidParams, notFound, staleSession.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "editors_openAdd"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noteNoOptional draft to prefill: {noteType?, deck?, fields?, tags?}.
sessionNoOptional. Collection session ID: the `session` field returned by `collection_get`. Usually omit it — the server then uses the session current at the time of the call. Pass it to make the call fail with `staleSession` instead of acting on a different profile/collection than the one your IDs, cursors and tokens came from.
timeoutSecondsNoMCP option (not sent to Anki): how long to wait for completion. A timeout does not cancel the work; the pending record is returned.
waitForCompletionNoMCP option (not sent to Anki): poll operations.get until the operation finishes and return its final record. If false, return the operation handle.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only give readOnly=false, destructive=false and openWorld=false; the description goes well beyond them with method mapping, scope (collection), effect (gui), completion (operation), and 'Undo: none'. It also discloses that this is long-running, that the server waits by default, and enumerates the concrete failure modes (collectionUnavailable, editorConflict, staleSession, etc.) so the agent knows what can go wrong.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and the draft option, then layered metadata (scope/effect/undo), then long-running behavior, then errors — a sensible ordering with no filler sentences. It is somewhat dense, and 'Use the active legacy/Svelte variant' reads as an unexplained directive without surrounding context.

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?

With no output schema, the description still covers the important return semantics (noteId=null until persisted, operation handle when waitForCompletion is false, pending record on timeout) and the error surface. It stops short of describing the full operation record shape, leaving that to operations.get, which is a reasonable but not fully closed gap for a GUI-mutating operation tool.

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 note/deck/noteType/tags/fields structure, the session ID and the two MCP options are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds only the return-side guarantee (noteId stays null until persisted, ID 0 is not a promise), which is about output rather than parameter meaning, so this sits at the baseline.

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 ('Open or activate the configured Add editor') plus an optional capability ('populate a draft'), which cleanly separates it from editors_openNote (existing note) and editors_updateDraft (mutating an open draft). The sibling names in the list would let an agent pick this one without opening a schema.

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?

Provides real usage constraints — 'Use the active legacy/Svelte variant' and 'Do not run duplicate/empty-field eligibility checks on an unfinished draft' — plus the synchronous-vs-handle behavior tied to waitForCompletion. It does not explicitly name when to prefer editors_openNote or notes_create over this tool, so selection guidance is contextual rather than spelled out.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools