Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Headquarter

Headquarter

by axeldotdev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

update_note

Update a note's content by specifying its ID and new text.

Instructions

Update an existing note

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": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "content": "<content>"
    },
    "name": "update_note"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesNote ID (8-character UUID)
contentYesNote content

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It only states 'Update an existing note' but does not disclose what happens if note doesn't exist, whether partial updates are allowed, or any security/permission implications. Minimal behavioral insight.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Single sentence, efficient but overly minimal. Could include more context without becoming verbose. Not wasteful but lacks substance.

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?

Given no output schema and simple update operation, description fails to explain return value, error handling, or idempotency. For a tool with 2 parameters and no annotations, more context is needed for completeness.

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 coverage is 100% with both parameters described. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as no extra value is provided.

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 'Update an existing note' clearly states the verb (update) and resource (note), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_note and delete_note. It is specific and not a tautology.

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 such as create_note for new notes. No prerequisites mentioned (e.g., note must exist). The description lacks any context for appropriate usage.

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