Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
io.github.henilcalagiya/mcp-apple-notes

io.github.henilcalagiya/mcp-apple-notes

by henilcalagiya
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

search_notes

Search through all Apple Notes to find notes containing specified keywords. Returns note names, IDs, folder locations, and matched keywords.

Instructions

Search for notes containing the specified keywords.

Features:

  • Searches through all notes in Apple Notes

  • Finds notes containing any of the specified keywords

  • Case-insensitive search in note content

  • Returns note details with matched keywords

Output Format:

  • Numbered list of matching notes

  • Note names, IDs, and folder locations

  • Matched keywords for each note

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": {
      "keywords": "<keywords>"
    },
    "name": "search_notes"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keywordsYesComma-separated keywords to search for in note content

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.2

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Discloses case-insensitive search, searches all notes, returns names, IDs, folders, and matched keywords. No annotations provided, so description carries burden; it is fairly transparent but could mention performance or scope limits.

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?

Concise with clear bullet points and sections for features and output format. No unnecessary words, well front-loaded with purpose.

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?

Covers purpose, features, output format sufficiently for a simple search tool. Does not mention result limits or whether trashed notes are excluded, but given output schema exists for return values, completeness is adequate.

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?

Schema covers 100% of parameters. Description adds that keywords are comma-separated and explains how they are used to search content, enhancing understanding beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states it searches for notes by keywords, with specific verb 'search' and resource 'notes'. Distinguishes from sibling CRUD and listing tools by focusing on content search.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Describes when to use (searching notes by keywords) and features like case-insensitivity. Does not explicitly state when not to use or compare with alternatives like list_all_notes, but implied usage is clear.

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