Skip to main content
Glama
onigeya

SiYuan Note MCP Server

by onigeya
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

SiYuan Note MCP Server

一个 MCP 服务器实现，提供与思源笔记系统的集成，使 AI 模型能够访问和操作笔记数据。

An MCP server implementation that provides integration with the SiYuan Note system, enabling AI models to access and manipulate note data.

功能特性 | Features

  • 笔记本管理 | Notebook Management

  • 文档操作 | Document Operations

  • 内容块控制 | Block Control

  • 文件和资源管理 | File and Asset Management

  • SQL 查询支持 | SQL Query Support

  • 属性管理 | Attribute Management

  • 导出和转换 | Export and Conversion

  • 系统功能 | System Functions

Related MCP server: MCP Notes Server

命令列表 | Command List

所有命令都支持使用 help 查询获取详细说明。例如：

All commands support detailed documentation via the help command. For example:

{
  "type": "help",
  "params": {
    "type": "block.insertBlock"
  }
}

资源管理 | Asset Management

  • assets.uploadAssets - 上传资源文件 | Upload assets

属性管理 | Attribute Management

  • attr.setBlockAttrs - 设置块属性 | Set block attributes

  • attr.getBlockAttrs - 获取块属性 | Get block attributes

内容块操作 | Block Operations

  • block.insertBlock - 插入内容块 | Insert a block

  • block.updateBlock - 更新内容块 | Update block content

  • block.deleteBlock - 删除内容块 | Delete a block

  • block.moveBlock - 移动内容块 | Move a block

  • block.getBlockKramdown - 获取块的 Markdown 内容 | Get block Kramdown content

格式转换 | Format Conversion

  • convert.pandoc - 使用 Pandoc 转换内容 | Convert content using Pandoc

导出功能 | Export Functions

  • export.exportNotebook - 导出笔记本 | Export notebook

  • export.exportDoc - 导出文档 | Export document

文件操作 | File Operations

  • file.getFile - 获取文件内容 | Get file content

  • file.putFile - 写入文件内容 | Put file content

  • file.removeFile - 删除文件 | Remove file

  • file.readDir - 读取目录内容 | List files in directory

文档树操作 | File Tree Operations

  • filetree.createDocWithMd - 使用 Markdown 创建文档 | Create document with Markdown

  • filetree.renameDoc - 重命名文档 | Rename document

  • filetree.removeDoc - 删除文档 | Remove document

  • filetree.moveDocs - 移动文档 | Move documents

  • filetree.getHPathByPath - 获取文档可读路径 | Get document HPath by path

  • filetree.getHPathByID - 通过 ID 获取文档可读路径 | Get document HPath by ID

网络代理 | Network Proxy

  • network.forwardProxy - 网络请求代理 | Forward proxy request

笔记本管理 | Notebook Management

  • notebook.lsNotebooks - 列出所有笔记本 | List all notebooks

  • notebook.openNotebook - 打开笔记本 | Open notebook

  • notebook.closeNotebook - 关闭笔记本 | Close notebook

  • notebook.renameNotebook - 重命名笔记本 | Rename notebook

  • notebook.createNotebook - 创建笔记本 | Create notebook

  • notebook.removeNotebook - 删除笔记本 | Remove notebook

  • notebook.getNotebookConf - 获取笔记本配置 | Get notebook configuration

  • notebook.setNotebookConf - 设置笔记本配置 | Set notebook configuration

通知提醒 | Notifications

  • notification.pushMsg - 发送消息通知 | Push message notification

  • notification.pushErrMsg - 发送错误通知 | Push error message notification

查询功能 | Query Functions

  • query.sql - 执行 SQL 查询 | Execute SQL query

  • query.block - 通过 ID 查询块 | Query block by ID

搜索功能 | Search Functions

  • search.fullTextSearch - 全文搜索 | Full text search

SQL 查询 | SQL Query

  • sql.sql - 执行 SQL 查询 | Execute SQL query

系统功能 | System Functions

  • system.getBootProgress - 获取启动进度 | Get boot progress

  • system.getVersion - 获取系统版本 | Get system version

  • system.getCurrentTime - 获取当前时间 | Get current time

模板功能 | Template Functions

  • template.renderTemplate - 渲染模板 | Render template

  • template.renderSprig - 渲染 Sprig 模板 | Render Sprig template

使用说明 | Usage

环境变量配置 | Environment Variables

服务器需要配置以下环境变量： The server requires the following environment variables:

  • SIYUAN_TOKEN - 思源笔记 API 令牌（必需）| SiYuan Note API token (required)

    • 在思源笔记设置 - 关于 中查看 | Check in SiYuan Note Settings - About

    • 用于 API 认证 | Used for API authentication

在 Claude Desktop 中使用 | Using in Claude Desktop

将以下配置添加到 claude_desktop_config.json： Add the following configuration to claude_desktop_config.json:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "siyuan": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@onigeya/siyuan-mcp-server"
      ],
      "env": {
        "SIYUAN_TOKEN": "your-siyuan-token"
      }
    }
  }
}

本地运行 | Local Run

  1. 安装依赖 | Install dependencies:

pnpm install

  1. 设置环境变量 | Set environment variables:

# Windows
set SIYUAN_TOKEN=your-siyuan-token

# Linux/macOS
export SIYUAN_TOKEN=your-siyuan-token

  1. 启动服务 | Start service:

pnpm start

Docker 运行 | Docker Run

docker run --rm -i \
  -e SIYUAN_TOKEN=your-siyuan-token \
  mcp/siyuan

构建 | Build

环境要求 | Requirements

  • Node.js >= 23.10.0

  • pnpm

本地构建 | Local Build

pnpm build

Docker 构建 | Docker Build

docker build -t mcp/siyuan .

许可证 | License

本项目基于 ISC 许可证发布。这意味着你可以自由使用、修改和分发本软件，但需要遵守 ISC 许可证的条款和条件。详细信息请参见项目仓库中的 LICENSE 文件。

This project is released under the ISC License. This means you can freely use, modify, and distribute this software, subject to the terms and conditions of the ISC License. For detailed information, please refer to the LICENSE file in the project repository.

相关资源 | Related Resources

Available Tools

3 tools
executeCommandD

执行指定的命令

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsNo命令参数
typeYes命令类型

TDQS

D1.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations present, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely states 'execute the specified command' without mentioning whether it can cause side effects, require permissions, return output, or fail. For a command execution tool, this is a significant transparency gap.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is a single short sentence, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It lacks essential information and reads like a placeholder, similar to the low-quality 'process' example.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

This tool has two parameters including a nested object, no output schema, and no annotations. The description provides no details on supported command types, parameter structure, return values, or safety implications. It is critically incomplete for an operational 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?

The input schema provides descriptions for both parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's minimal 'command type' and 'command parameters' labels, but the schema at least names the parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose1/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description '执行指定的命令' (Execute the specified command) is a direct tautology of the tool name 'executeCommand'. It does not specify what types of commands, which resources, or how it differs from siblings like queryCommands or help.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description gives no context on when to use executeCommand versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions.

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

helpB

获取命令的帮助信息

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYes命令类型

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full weight. 'Get help information' implies a read-only, harmless operation, but it does not disclose any specific behaviors such as the format of returned help text, potential errors, or whether it depends on command types. This is acceptable for a simple help tool but lacks depth.

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 concise sentence that is directly to the point. It has no fluff or redundant information, making it highly efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple help tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally viable. However, it lacks details about acceptable values for 'type', the nature of the help output, and any examples. This leaves gaps that could confuse an agent.

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 the parameter 'type' described as '命令类型' (command type). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Since the schema is complete, the 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?

The description '获取命令的帮助信息' (Get help information for commands) clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from siblings like executeCommand and queryCommands by focusing on help, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 like queryCommands or executeCommand. There is no context about prerequisites, expected usage, or exclusions.

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

queryCommandsA

查询可用的命令列表

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
namespaceNo命令命名空间过滤
typeNo命令名称过滤

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The word '查询' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly state that it makes no changes, nor does it disclose any permissions or return format details. However, for a simple query tool, the implied safety may be sufficient.

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, concise sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose. There is no redundant information or unnecessary elaboration.

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 the tool's simplicity and the schema's full parameter coverage, the description provides the essential function. However, it could be improved by explicitly mentioning that it returns a list or how filters interact, but the phrase '命令列表' implies the return type. Overall, it is adequate.

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?

The input schema covers both parameters (type and namespace) with descriptions, achieving 100% coverage. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so it does not enhance what the schema already provides. Thus, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb '查询' (query) and identifies the resource as the list of available commands, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like executeCommand and help. It does not just restate the tool name, but elaborates on what is being queried.

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 like help or executeCommand, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. It leaves the usage to be inferred from the tool name and description.

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. 3 tool updatesv1.0.0
    • First observedexecuteCommand
    • First observedhelp
    • First observedqueryCommands
Deploy Server
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Scored across 3 tools

Disambiguation5/5

The three tools have clearly distinct purposes: executeCommand performs actions, help provides documentation, and queryCommands lists available commands. There is no overlap in functionality, making it easy for an agent to select the correct tool for each task.

Naming Consistency4/5

The tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (executeCommand, queryCommands) with one minor deviation (help is a noun-only name). This small inconsistency does not significantly impact readability or predictability, as the naming is still clear and logical.

Tool Count3/5

With only 3 tools, the server feels thin for a note-taking domain, as it lacks operations for creating, reading, updating, or deleting notes directly. While the tools provide a command-based interface, the count is borderline low for the apparent scope of managing notes in SiYuan.

Completeness2/5

The tool surface is significantly incomplete for a note-taking server. There are no tools for core CRUD operations on notes (e.g., create_note, get_note, update_note, delete_note), which are essential for agent workflows. The current tools only support command execution and help, leaving major gaps in functionality.

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

Appeared in Searches