Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
nexterm-mcp

nexterm-mcp

by X1pheR
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

nexterm_reposition_entry

Move a Nexterm entry to a new position within a folder, placing it before or after a target entry to adjust ordering.

Instructions

Reposition or move a Nexterm entry.

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": {
      "entry_id": "<entry_id>",
      "placement": "<placement>"
    },
    "name": "nexterm_reposition_entry"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
entry_idYes
folder_idNo
placementYes
target_idNo
organization_idNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare that this is a non-read-only, non-idempotent mutation, and the description only restates that it moves an entry. It adds no behavioral detail such as target requirements, ordering semantics, permission needs, or what happens when optional fields are omitted.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted wording. It is concise, though its brevity contributes to the missing usage and parameter detail.

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?

For a five-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and no parameter descriptions, the definition is not complete enough. It gives the basic action but leaves ordering behavior and optional relationships between folder_id, target_id, and organization_id unexplained.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the description does not explain any of the five parameters. It implies generic repositioning but does not clarify the roles of entry_id, folder_id, placement, target_id, or organization_id.

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?

The description states a specific action, reposition/move, and a specific resource, a Nexterm entry. It is understandable without opening the schema, though it does not distinguish this tool from siblings such as nexterm_update_entry or nexterm_reposition_script.

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 instead of update_entry, create_entry, or the reposition_script/reposition_snippet siblings. No prerequisites, constraints, or exclusions 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

Other Tools