Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Goodnotes Web MCP

Goodnotes Web MCP

by hb442
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

goodnotes_manage_outline

Destructive

Rename or delete a single flat outline entry by matching its exact title and hashes, then verify all entries and page order after reload without deleting any page.

Instructions

Rename or delete one flat native outline entry using its exact old title, outline hash and page-order hash. Rename requires title. Saves private metadata and verifies every exposed outline entry and page order after reload. Never deletes a page.

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": {
      "url": "<url>",
      "outlineId": "<outlineId>",
      "expectedTitle": "<expectedTitle>",
      "expectedOutlineHash": "<expectedOutlineHash>",
      "expectedPageOrderHash": "<expectedPageOrderHash>",
      "command": "<command>",
      "operationId": "<operationId>"
    },
    "name": "goodnotes_manage_outline"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYes
titleNo
commandYes
outlineIdYes
operationIdYes
expectedTitleYes
expectedOutlineHashYes
expectedPageOrderHashYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.21.1

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the destructive/open-world annotations, the description discloses meaningful behavior: exact old title and hash matching for optimistic concurrency, private metadata saving, and verification of outline entries and page order after reload. It also narrows the destructiveness by stating it never deletes a page. It does not explain failure behavior on hash mismatch, so it falls short of a 5.

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 four tightly written sentences with no filler. Purpose, mode-specific requirement, side effects, and deletion scope are all front-loaded and each sentence adds distinct value.

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 destructive mutation with no output schema and eight parameters, the description covers the most important behavioral and concurrency semantics. It is still incomplete because it does not explain identifier or operationId semantics, error behavior on stale hashes, or when to choose this over sibling management tools.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the burden and it partially does: it explains the exact old title, outline hash, page-order hash, command modes, and the conditional title requirement for rename. However, it leaves url, outlineId, and especially operationId unexplained, which is a significant gap across eight parameters.

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 names specific operations (rename or delete) and a precise resource: one flat native outline entry. It also clarifies scope by stating it never deletes a page, which helps distinguish it from page operations, though it does not explicitly name a sibling alternative.

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?

It gives a useful conditional rule that rename requires title, but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus goodnotes_manage_pages or other outline-related operations. The 'Never deletes a page' note implies a boundary, but alternatives and exclusions are only partially covered.

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