Notes MCP Server
mcp-server-on-raspi MCP 服务器
MCP 服务器项目
成分
资源
服务器实现了一个简单的笔记存储系统,其中包括:
用于访问单个笔记的自定义 note:// URI 方案
每个笔记资源都有一个名称、描述和文本/纯文本 mimetype
提示
服务器提供一个提示:
总结笔记:创建所有存储笔记的摘要
可选的“样式”参数用于控制详细程度(简要/详细)
生成提示,结合所有当前注释和样式偏好
工具
服务器实现了一个工具:
add-note:向服务器添加新注释
将“名称”和“内容”作为必需的字符串参数
更新服务器状态并通知客户端资源变化
Related MCP server: mcp-meituan-ip
配置
[TODO:添加特定于您的实现的配置详细信息]
快速入门
安装
克劳德桌面
在 MacOS 上: ~/Library/Application\ Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json在 Windows 上: %APPDATA%/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json
发展
构建和发布
准备分发包:
同步依赖项并更新锁文件:
uv sync构建软件包分发版:
uv build这将在dist/目录中创建源和轮子分布。
发布到 PyPI:
uv publish注意:您需要通过环境变量或命令标志设置 PyPI 凭据:
令牌:
--token或UV_PUBLISH_TOKEN或用户名/密码:
--username/UV_PUBLISH_USERNAME和--password/UV_PUBLISH_PASSWORD
调试
由于 MCP 服务器通过 stdio 运行,调试起来可能比较困难。为了获得最佳调试体验,我们强烈建议使用MCP Inspector 。
您可以使用以下命令通过npm启动 MCP Inspector:
npx @modelcontextprotocol/inspector uv --directory /Users/daikiwatanabe/ghq/github.com/daikw/mcp-server-on-raspi run mcp-server-on-raspi启动后,检查器将显示一个 URL,您可以在浏览器中访问该 URL 以开始调试。
Available Tools
1 tooladd-noteC
Add a new note
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| content | Yes | ||
| name | Yes |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Add a new note' and provides no details on side effects, permissions, return values, or error behavior.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single short sentence with no wasted words, making it concise and front-loaded. However, it is under-specified for the tool's complexity, though this is largely a completeness issue rather than a conciseness issue.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the lack of annotations, output schema, and parameter descriptions, a five-word description is insufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly. The meaning of the parameters and expected return behavior remain ambiguous.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema has zero description coverage for the two required parameters ('name' and 'content'), and the description does not explain their meaning or format. The agent cannot infer what 'name' or 'content' represent.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb ('Add') and a specific resource ('note'), clearly stating the tool's function. It differentiates itself from the sibling 'get_report', which is a read operation.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states the action without any context about when to invoke it or when to choose a sibling tool.
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 tool update
v1.0.0- First observed
add-note
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
With only one tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap between tools. The single tool 'add-note' has a clear and distinct purpose that cannot be confused with any other tool in this set.
The naming follows a consistent verb-noun pattern with 'add-note', and since there is only one tool, there is no inconsistency to evaluate. The naming is clear and predictable within this minimal set.
A single tool is too few for a server named 'Notes MCP Server', which implies a broader scope for managing notes (e.g., creating, reading, updating, deleting). This minimal set feels incomplete and under-scoped for the apparent domain.
The tool surface is severely incomplete for a notes management server. It only provides an 'add-note' tool, lacking essential operations like retrieving, updating, deleting, or listing notes, which will cause significant agent failures in typical workflows.
Related MCP Connectors
Persistent memory layer for AI tools. Save and recall notes across Claude and other MCP clients.
Notes and actions in one app. Let Claude or ChatGPT read and update them.
Notes and memory assistant: one Markdown vault that Claude, ChatGPT and any MCP client can share.
Notes, tasks, habits, journal and 6 more tools Claude can read and change, with undo. Free.
Related MCP Servers
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA Claude-compatible MCP server that enables storing and summarizing notes through a simple note storage system with custom URI scheme.5-
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceA simple note storage system that allows creating, storing, and summarizing notes with customizable detail levels.2MIT
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceA simple system that allows Claude to leave and manage notes for itself across sessions, functioning like an 'Alexa, remind me...' for AI assistants.72MIT
- FlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceA simple notes system that allows creating, storing, and accessing text notes through MCP resources and tools, with prompt support for generating summaries of all stored notes.137 npm-