notebooklm-mcp

by gracelee087

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

notebook_share_public

Toggle a notebook's public share link and receive its share URL when public sharing is enabled.

Instructions

Toggle the public share link on a notebook. Returns the share URL when enabled.

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": {
      "notebook_id": "<notebook_id>"
    },
    "name": "notebook_share_public"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`enable`	No
`notebook_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

The description discloses that the tool returns the share URL when enabled, which is helpful. However, it does not specify what happens when disabled, whether permissions are needed, or the effect on existing links. Since there are no annotations, the description carries the full burden but provides minimal behavioral detail.

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 extremely concise at two sentences, with no filler. It front-loads the main action and includes the key return behavior in a compact format.

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?

The tool is relatively simple (2 parameters, boolean toggle), and the description covers the primary function and return value. However, it omits important context about the disabled state, prerequisites, and relationship to other sharing tools, making it only minimally 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain the parameters. It fails to mention notebook_id or the enable boolean explicitly, though 'when enabled' loosely implies the 'enable' flag. The effective behavior of toggling is not clarified for either parameter value.

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 clearly states the verb 'Toggle' and the resource 'public share link on a notebook', specifying the action and object. It distinguishes from sibling tools like notebook_share_invite by focusing on the public link mechanism, and notes the return value (share URL when enabled).

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, conditions for enabling/disabling, or how this relates to notebook_share_invite. Usage context is only implied by the verb 'toggle', but no explicit direction is given.

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