Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Goodnotes Web MCP

Goodnotes Web MCP

by hb442
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

goodnotes_move_native_object

Destructive

Move a text box, sticky, or image to another allowed Goodnotes page with verification: save source, confirm native copy, then delete original. Failure may leave two copies.

Instructions

Move one text box/sticky or image from a whiteboard or notebook page to another allowed document. Saves a source PDF, verifies a native copy, reacquires the unchanged original before deleting it, and rechecks both ends. Separate operations, not atomic; failure can leave two copies.

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": {
      "sourceUrl": "<sourceUrl>",
      "target": "<target>",
      "content": "<content>",
      "destinationPath": "<destinationPath>",
      "x": "<x>",
      "y": "<y>",
      "operationId": "<operationId>"
    },
    "name": "goodnotes_move_native_object"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
xYes
yYes
targetYes
contentYes
sourceUrlYes
operationIdYes
destinationPageNo
destinationPathYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.21.1

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true, openWorldHint=true) by describing the exact internal sequence: save source PDF, verify native copy, reacquire the unchanged original before deleting, recheck both ends. It then discloses the critical consequence — operations are not atomic and failure can leave two copies — which directly informs risk handling.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and object, then the sequencing, then the risk caveat. No wasted wording and the safety warning lands at the end where it belongs.

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 behavioral story is complete for a mutating cross-document move, but with no output schema the description never says what the call returns (verification results, new object id) and never addresses the 8 undocumented parameters. Adequate for risk assessment, incomplete for correct invocation.

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% across 8 parameters (7 required), including deeply nested 'target' and a oneOf 'content' with expectedText vs expectedSha256+expectedCrop. The description names no parameter and explains no semantics such as operationId idempotency, matchId/objectId resolution, destinationPath ordering, or x/y coordinate framing, so it fails to compensate for the 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 and resource with scope: 'Move one text box/sticky or image from a whiteboard or notebook page to another allowed document.' The object kinds and cross-document scope distinguish it reasonably from copy/arrange siblings, though it does not name an alternative to route away from.

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?

Implies usage through 'another allowed document,' which signals a destination restriction, and the non-atomic warning hints at caution. But there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or pointer to alternatives like copy or verify_moved_object, leaving the agent to infer selection.

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