@growi/mcp-server

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

createPage

Idempotent

Create a new wiki page by specifying the path and body content. Optionally set permissions, tags, and assign to a specific GROWI app.

Instructions

Create a new page in GROWI

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>",
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "createPage"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`body`	Yes
`path`	Yes
`grant`	No
`appName`	No	GROWI app name to operate on (optional, uses default if not specified)
`pageTags`	No
`grantUserGroupIds`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.3.1May 28, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate the tool is not read-only and not destructive, and is idempotent. The description adds no further behavioral details, such as what happens on duplicate paths or any side effects. It is adequate but does not exceed what annotations provide.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single clear sentence, front-loaded with the core action. No unnecessary words, but could be expanded without losing conciseness.

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?

No output schema, and the description omits return value details, uniqueness constraints, or error conditions. Given 6 parameters and a creation task, the description is insufficient for complete understanding.

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 only 17%, and the description adds no meaning to any of the 6 parameters. For a tool with low schema coverage, the description should compensate but fails to do so.

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 'Create a new page in GROWI' clearly states verb (create) and resource (page), distinguishing it from sibling tools like updatePage or renamePage.

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. No exclusions, prerequisites, or context about typical use cases.

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