Skip to main content
Glama
enesjakozh
YuheiNakasaka

Scrapbox MCP Server

by YuheiNakasaka
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

scrapbox-mcp MCP 서버

모델 컨텍스트 프로토콜 서버

간단한 메모 시스템을 구현하는 TypeScript 기반 MCP 서버입니다. 다음을 제공하여 핵심 MCP 개념을 보여줍니다.

  • URI 및 메타데이터를 사용하여 텍스트 노트를 나타내는 리소스

  • 새로운 노트를 만드는 도구

  • 노트 요약 생성을 위한 프롬프트

특징

자원

  • note:// URI를 통해 메모를 나열하고 액세스합니다.

  • 각 노트에는 제목, 내용 및 메타데이터가 있습니다.

  • 간단한 콘텐츠 액세스를 위한 일반 텍스트 MIME 유형

도구

  • create_note - 새로운 텍스트 노트 만들기

    • 제목과 내용을 필수 매개변수로 사용합니다.

    • 서버 상태에 메모 저장

프롬프트

  • summarize_notes - 저장된 모든 노트의 요약을 생성합니다.

    • 모든 노트 내용을 내장 리소스로 포함합니다.

    • LLM 요약을 위한 구조화된 프롬프트를 반환합니다.

Related MCP server: Browser-use MCP Server

개발

종속성 설치:

지엑스피1

서버를 빌드하세요:

npm run build

자동 재빌드를 사용한 개발의 경우:

npm run watch

설치

Claude Desktop과 함께 사용하려면 서버 구성을 추가하세요.

MacOS의 경우: ~/Library/Application Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json Windows의 경우: %APPDATA%/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "scrapbox-mcp": {
      "command": "/path/to/scrapbox-mcp/build/index.js"
    }
  }
}

디버깅

MCP 서버는 stdio를 통해 통신하므로 디버깅이 어려울 수 있습니다. 패키지 스크립트로 제공되는 MCP Inspector를 사용하는 것이 좋습니다.

npm run inspector

검사기는 브라우저에서 디버깅 도구에 액세스할 수 있는 URL을 제공합니다.

Available Tools

1 tool
get_page_contentB

Fetch content from a Scrapbox page by URL

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesScrapbox page URL (e.g., https://scrapbox.io/project-name/page-title)

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool fetches content but lacks details on behavioral traits such as error handling (e.g., invalid URLs, authentication needs), rate limits, or what 'content' entails (e.g., raw HTML, parsed text). This leaves significant gaps for an agent.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with zero waste—it directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's low complexity (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally complete. It covers the basic purpose but lacks details on behavior and output, which are needed for full contextual understanding. It's adequate but has clear gaps.

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%, with the parameter 'url' fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying it's for Scrapbox pages, which the schema example already suggests. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the action ('Fetch content') and target resource ('from a Scrapbox page by URL'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't need to differentiate from siblings since none exist, but it could be more specific about what 'content' includes (e.g., text, metadata, structure).

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?

The description implies usage when needing page content from a Scrapbox URL, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other fetching methods) or any prerequisites. With no sibling tools, the baseline is adequate but unguided.

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.

  1. 1 tool update
    • First observedget_page_content
Deploy Server
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Scored across 1 tool

Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or overlap between tools, making disambiguation perfect. The tool's purpose is clearly defined and distinct by default.

Naming Consistency5/5

The single tool follows a clear verb_noun pattern (get_page_content), and with no other tools to compare, consistency is inherently perfect. There are no deviations or mixed conventions.

Tool Count2/5

One tool is too few for a server named 'Scrapbox MCP Server', which implies broader functionality for interacting with Scrapbox pages. A single fetch tool feels thin and limited in scope, suggesting an incomplete or minimal implementation.

Completeness2/5

The tool surface is severely incomplete for a Scrapbox server, covering only fetching page content. Obvious gaps include creating, updating, deleting, or listing pages, which are essential operations for managing a wiki or note-taking system like Scrapbox.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

Appeared in Searches