Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
apple-productivity-mcp

apple-productivity-mcp

by gambadio
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

apple_notes_create_folder

Create a top-level folder in a specified Apple Notes account. Organize notes by account when you need a new folder.

Instructions

Create a top-level Notes folder in an explicit account.

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": {
      "accountId": "<accountId>",
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "apple_notes_create_folder"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
accountIdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv3.0.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (not read-only, open-world, non-idempotent, non-destructive). The description adds two real constraints beyond them: folders are created top-level only (no nesting), and an account must be explicitly supplied. It does not say what happens on a duplicate name, but for an annotated tool this is solid added context.

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?

A single sentence with the resource and scope front-loaded and zero filler. Nothing to trim.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, the annotations cover the safety profile and the description covers scope plus the account requirement. Missing behavioral details (duplicate-name handling, what 'account' resolves to, whether the created folder is returned) leave it adequate but not complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. 'Explicit account' maps loosely to accountId and hints it is required, but the 'name' parameter (min 1, max 500) is never addressed, nor is what constitutes a valid account reference. Only marginal compensation for a full coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb (Create), resource (Notes folder), and scope (top-level, in an explicit account), which distinguishes it from apple_notes_create (a note) and apple_files_create_folder. It stops short of naming a sibling, but the resource is precise enough to route correctly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied (create a folder when you need one), and 'in an explicit account' hints at a prerequisite, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative such as apple_notes_create or apple_notes_list_folders.

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