NoteDiscovery MCP Server

create_note

Save new information or update existing notes as markdown files. Create or modify note content by specifying a path and markdown.

Instructions

Create a new note or update an existing one. The note will be saved as a markdown file. Use this to save new information or update existing notes.

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": {
      "path": "<path>",
      "content": "<content>"
    },
    "name": "create_note"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`path`	Yes	Path for the note (e.g., 'folder/new-note.md'). Include .md extension.
`content`	Yes	Markdown content for the note

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jun 24, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

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. It discloses that notes are saved as markdown files, but lacks details on idempotency, side effects (e.g., overwriting existing files), or prerequisites. For a tool that can both create and update, more behavioral context is needed.

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?

Two sentences with no redundancy. Front-loaded with the core action and format, then usage guidance. Every sentence contributes value without waste.

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 low complexity (2 simple parameters, no output schema, no nested objects), the description sufficiently covers its purpose and format. However, it could mention the return value or confirmation behavior for completeness.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description adds value by specifying the path pattern (including .md extension) and that the content is markdown. This extra context helps the agent understand parameter expectations beyond the schema.

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 tool 'Create a new note or update an existing one,' specifying the verb (create/update) and resource (note). It distinguishes from siblings like append_to_note and create_note_from_template by mentioning both actions, though it could be more explicit about when to use each.

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?

The description says 'Use this to save new information or update existing notes,' which implies usage but does not provide explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives. With siblings like append_to_note, more guidance on choosing between create/update vs append would improve clarity.

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