Skip to main content
Glama

get_project_note_history

Retrieve the edit history of a specific note in a project to track changes and revisions.

Instructions

指定したプロジェクト内のノートの履歴を取得します

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectIdYesプロジェクトID
noteIdYesノートID

Implementation Reference

  • API method that executes the Repsona API call to fetch note history. Calls the /history/project/{projectId}/Note/{noteId} endpoint.
    async getProjectNoteHistory(projectId, noteId) {
      return this.makeRequest(`/history/project/${projectId}/Note/${noteId}`);
    }
  • MCP tool handler that receives the CallToolRequest, extracts projectId and noteId from args, calls the API method, and returns the result as JSON text.
    case 'get_project_note_history':
      const noteHistory = await this.repsonaAPI.getProjectNoteHistory(args.projectId, args.noteId);
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text',
            text: JSON.stringify(noteHistory, null, 2),
          },
        ],
      };
  • Tool schema definition and registration in the ListToolsRequestSchema handler. Defines the tool name, description, and input schema requiring projectId and noteId.
    {
      name: 'get_project_note_history',
      description: '指定したプロジェクト内のノートの履歴を取得します',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          projectId: { type: 'string', description: 'プロジェクトID' },
          noteId: { type: 'string', description: 'ノートID' },
        },
        required: ['projectId', 'noteId'],
      },
    },
  • index.js:681-692 (registration)
    Tool is registered as part of the tools array returned by ListToolsRequestSchema handler, making it discoverable to MCP clients.
    {
      name: 'get_project_note_history',
      description: '指定したプロジェクト内のノートの履歴を取得します',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          projectId: { type: 'string', description: 'プロジェクトID' },
          noteId: { type: 'string', description: 'ノートID' },
        },
        required: ['projectId', 'noteId'],
      },
    },
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavior. It only says 'get history' but does not specify what history entails (e.g., edit logs, version changes), pagination, permissions, or side effects. Vague and insufficient.

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?

Description is a single sentence, concise but under-specified. It lacks important details that would make it more useful, making it borderline incomplete rather than efficiently concise.

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, no annotations, and many sibling note tools, the description fails to provide sufficient context for an agent to understand what 'history' means or how it differs from activity logs or comments. Incomplete.

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 parameter descriptions for projectId and noteId. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 applies.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'get' and resource 'history of a note in a specified project'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_project_note (detail), get_project_note_activity_log, etc., although not explicitly. The scope is well-defined.

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 versus alternatives such as get_project_note_activity_log or get_project_note_comments. The description lacks context about the specific use case for history retrieval.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/bellx2/repsona-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server