notebooklm-mcp-cli

Note

note

Create, list, update, or delete items within a notebook to organize information and streamline content management.

Instructions

Manage notes in a notebook. Unified tool for all note operations.

Supports: create, list, update, delete

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`title`	No	Note title (optional for create/update)
`action`	Yes	Operation to perform: - create: Create a new note - list: List all notes in notebook - update: Update an existing note - delete: Delete a note permanently (requires confirm=True)
`confirm`	No	Must be True for delete action
`content`	No	Note content (required for create, optional for update)
`note_id`	No	Note UUID (required for update/delete)
`notebook_id`	Yes	Notebook UUID

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.11.5Sep 18, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior, but it only lists operations. It does not mention that delete is permanent, that confirmation is required, or any other side effects, prerequisites, or safety considerations.

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 short, front-loaded, and easy to scan. The operation list is useful, though the phrase 'Unified tool for all note operations' is slightly redundant with the first sentence.

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 description gives a high-level overview and covers the main operations, but it omits practical context such as destructive behavior, confirm requirements, or when to use sibling tools. The output schema reduces the need to explain return values, so this is adequate but not thorough.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no meaningful parameter semantics beyond what the schema already documents; the listed operations map to the action parameter but do not clarify action-dependent requirements.

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 clearly identifies the tool as managing notes in a notebook and enumerates the supported operations: create, list, update, delete. It is clear enough about the resource and scope, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like notebook_query or notebook_get.

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?

The phrase 'Unified tool for all note operations' implies when to use it, and the operation list gives concrete actions. However, there is no explicit guidance about when not to use it or which sibling tools might be preferable for note-related queries or notebook-level operations.

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