Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
colab-drive-mcp

colab-drive-mcp

by YummyTastyCode
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_local_notebook

Inspect a local .ipynb notebook by reading its summary and cell contents. Specify path and optional source inclusion with character limit.

Instructions

Read a local notebook summary and its cells.

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": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "get_local_notebook"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes
include_sourceNo
max_source_charsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.3

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavior. Only states 'Read', implying non-destructive, but omits details on what constitutes a 'summary', how cells are structured, or any performance implications. Lacks transparency on parameter effects.

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?

Single sentence that is clear and to the point, but at the cost of omitting necessary details. Efficient but not over-elaborate.

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?

With three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. Missing return value format, parameter explanations, and behavioral edge cases. Agent would need to guess or inspect further.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

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 three parameters (path format, include_source impact, max_source_chars limit). Relies entirely on schema, which lacks descriptions.

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?

Clear verb 'Read' and resource 'local notebook' with output described as 'summary and its cells'. Distinguishes from sibling tools like list_local_notebooks, which lists rather than reads a specific notebook.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like list_local_notebooks or search_local_cells. No context provided for prerequisites or common use cases.

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