Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AIMFP

AIMFP

by aryanduntley
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

search_notes

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search past decisions and context by keyword to recall why a decision was made or find historical context.

Instructions

Search past decisions and context by keyword. Use to recall why a decision was made or find historical context.

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": {
      "search_string": "<search_string>"
    },
    "name": "search_notes"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
search_stringYesSearch string for note content
note_typeNoOptional filter by note_type
reference_tableNoOptional filter by reference table
reference_idNoOptional filter by reference ID
sourceNoOptional filter by source
severityNoOptional filter by severity
directive_nameNoOptional filter by directive name
exclude_note_typesNoList of note_type values to exclude from results (e.g., ['completed', 'obsolete'])

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.37.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds no behavioral traits beyond this; it only reiterates the search purpose. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two concise sentences front-load the action and use case. Every word is functional with no redundancy.

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?

Given 8 parameters (all with schema descriptions) and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context for its search purpose. It lacks details about return format but is adequate for a read-only search 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% with each parameter well-documented. The description adds no additional meaning to parameters, maintaining the baseline 3.

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?

The description clearly states 'Search past decisions and context by keyword' with specific verb and resource, and provides a use case ('recall why a decision was made'). It distinguishes from sibling search tools by focusing on 'past decisions' and historical context.

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?

The description explicitly says 'Use to recall why a decision was made or find historical context,' providing a clear usage context. However, it does not specify when not to use this tool or mention alternatives like search_tracking_notes or search_directives.

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