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

anki-connect-mcp

by SolarianGG
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

reviewer.get

reviewer_get
Read-only

Read the active Anki reviewer state and retained custom scheduling predictions to inspect the current card, rendering, token, and answers.

Instructions

Read active reviewer state and retained custom scheduling predictions.

Inactive reviewer returns null card/rendered/token, side=none and empty answers.

Anki-Connect method reviewer.get. Scope: collection. Effect: read. Completion: completed. Undo: none.

Possible errors: collectionUnavailable, internalError, invalidParams, 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": "reviewer_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
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.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the read-only, non-destructive, closed-world profile, so the bar is lower. The description still adds genuine value: the inactive-reviewer return shape (null card/rendered/token, side=none, empty answers), the collection scope, undo=none, and an enumerated error set including staleSession.

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 core action, then the inactive-state caveat, then a compact metadata block and error list. The 'Effect: read' and 'Undo: none' lines partly restate the annotations, but the layout is scannable and largely earns its space.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by sketching the return fields and the inactive fallback, plus error conditions. It stops short of describing the custom scheduling prediction payload, which is the least clear part of the return.

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?

The single `session` parameter is fully documented in the schema, including the staleSession rationale, and the description adds nothing about it. Baseline 3 applies when schema coverage is 100%.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: read the active reviewer state plus retained custom scheduling predictions. This distinguishes it from mutating siblings such as reviewer_startTimer, reviewer_showQuestion, and reviewer_answer, though it never names those alternatives directly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied by the verb 'read' and the fact that it reports reviewer state. There is no explicit guidance on when to call this versus reviewer_showQuestion/showAnswer or scheduling_predict, and no stated preconditions beyond the inactive-reviewer note.

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