AI Notes MCP Server

Add note

add_note

Save a new note to your knowledge base with a title, Markdown content, and optional topic tags to group related notes by subject.

Instructions

Save a new note to the user's knowledge base. Use tags to group notes by topic (for example 'python', 'exam', 'ideas').

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": {
      "title": "<title>",
      "content": "<content>"
    },
    "name": "add_note"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tags`	No	Optional topic tags
`title`	Yes	Short title of the note
`content`	Yes	The note text (Markdown is fine)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 1, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and mostly does not meet it. It doesn't say whether duplicate titles are allowed, whether tags are created on the fly, whether the new note or its identifier is returned, or whether authentication/a specific user context is required.

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?

Two short sentences with no waste, front-loading the action and following with the only non-obvious parameter advice. Every sentence earns its place.

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 simple three-parameter creation tool with full schema documentation and no output schema, the essentials are present. However, the absence of annotations means behaviors an agent would want to know (return value, duplicate handling, tag creation) are left entirely unspecified.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, and the description genuinely adds meaning for the tags parameter by explaining its purpose ('group notes by topic') and giving concrete examples like 'python', 'exam', 'ideas'. Title and content are left to the schema, which already documents them well.

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: 'Save a new note to the user's knowledge base.' The word 'new' implicitly separates it from update_note, but no sibling is named explicitly, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of update_note as the alternative for modifying existing notes. The only steer is the implied creation semantics of 'new note' plus the tag-grouping advice, which is parameter guidance rather than tool selection guidance.

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

Deploy Server