Skip to main content
Glama
disnet
by disnet

get_note

Retrieve specific notes by identifier from your Flint Note vault to access organized markdown files with semantic types for AI collaboration.

Instructions

Retrieve a specific note by identifier

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
identifierYesNote identifier in format "type/filename" or full path
vault_idNoOptional vault ID to operate on. If not provided, uses the current active vault.
fieldsNoOptional array of field names to include in response. Supports dot notation for nested fields (e.g. "metadata.tags") and wildcard patterns (e.g. "metadata.*"). If not specified, all fields are returned.

Implementation Reference

  • The handleGetNote method implements the core logic for the 'get_note' tool. It validates input arguments, resolves the vault context, fetches the note using noteManager.getNote(args.identifier), optionally filters fields using filterNoteFields, and returns the result as a JSON text content block.
    handleGetNote = async (args: GetNoteArgs) => {
      // Validate arguments
      validateToolArgs('get_note', args);
    
      const { noteManager } = await this.resolveVaultContext(args.vault_id);
    
      const note = await noteManager.getNote(args.identifier);
    
      // Apply field filtering if specified
      const filteredNote = note ? filterNoteFields(note, args.fields) : null;
    
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text',
            text: JSON.stringify(filteredNote, null, 2)
          }
        ]
      };
    };
  • The JSON schema definition for the 'get_note' tool input parameters, used for validation. Requires 'identifier' (string), optional 'vault_id' (string) and 'fields' (array of strings for field selection).
      name: 'get_note',
      description: 'Retrieve a specific note by identifier with optional field filtering',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          identifier: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'Note identifier in type/filename format'
          },
          vault_id: {
            type: 'string',
            description:
              'Optional vault ID to search in. If not provided, uses the current active vault.'
          },
          fields: {
            type: 'array',
            items: {
              type: 'string'
            },
            description:
              'Optional list of fields to include in response (id, title, content, type, filename, path, created, updated, size, metadata)'
          }
        },
        required: ['identifier']
      }
    },
  • Registration of the 'get_note' tool handler in the MCP server's CallToolRequestSchema dispatch switch statement, mapping tool calls to this.noteHandlers.handleGetNote.
    case 'get_note':
      return await this.noteHandlers.handleGetNote(args as unknown as GetNoteArgs);
    case 'get_notes':
      return await this.noteHandlers.handleGetNotes(
        args as unknown as GetNotesArgs
      );
    case 'update_note':
  • TypeScript interface defining the input arguments for the get_note handler, used for type safety.
    export interface GetNoteArgs {
      identifier: string;
      vault_id?: string;
      fields?: string[];
    }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves a note but does not describe what 'retrieve' includes (e.g., content, metadata, formatting), potential errors (e.g., if the note doesn't exist), authentication needs, rate limits, or response format. For a read operation with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Retrieve a specific note by identifier') with zero wasted words. It directly communicates the essential action without redundancy or unnecessary elaboration, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 the complexity of a retrieval tool with 3 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what is retrieved (e.g., note content, metadata, or both), handle error cases, or provide context on sibling tools. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand the tool's full behavior and usage context.

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%, so the schema already documents all three parameters (identifier, vault_id, fields) with clear descriptions. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as examples of identifier formats or field usage. However, it implies retrieval by identifier, which aligns with the schema, earning the baseline score for high schema coverage.

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?

The description clearly states the verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('a specific note'), making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_notes' (plural retrieval) and 'get_note_info' (metadata retrieval) by specifying retrieval by identifier. However, it doesn't explicitly mention what 'retrieve' entails (e.g., content, metadata, or both), which prevents a perfect score.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools like 'get_note_info', 'get_note_links', 'search_notes', and 'list_notes_by_type', there is no indication of which tool is appropriate for different scenarios (e.g., retrieving full content vs. metadata vs. links). This lack of differentiation leaves the agent to guess based on tool names alone.

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/disnet/flint-note'

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