Skip to main content
Glama
katekruger

notion-plus-mcp-server

by katekruger
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Database Views

notion_views
Destructive

List, read, create, update, or delete Notion database views (table, board, list, calendar, timeline, gallery, form, map, chart). Place as tabs, page links, or dashboard widgets.

Instructions

List, read, create, update, or delete database views. Types: table, board, list, calendar, timeline, gallery, form, map, and chart (Notion's native, live charts: column, bar, line, donut, number, with stacking). A view can be a tab on the database (default), a linked view placed on any page (on: {page, after_block}), or a widget on a dashboard view (on: {dashboard}). Views take where/filter like notion_query, sorts, group_by (e.g. board by Status, dates by week), visible properties, and a chart spec like {type: "column", x: "Owner", y: "count"} or y: "sum:Estimate". Every change is reversible with notion_undo.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
onNocreate: place a linked view on a page, or a widget on a dashboard view. Omit for a database tab.
viewNocreate: the full view; update: name, type, and only what should change
limitNolist: views per page.
actionYes
cursorNolist: next_cursor from the previous page.
view_idNoget, update, delete (a view id or a view URL with ?v=)
databaseNolist, create
data_source_nameNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.0.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / cursor
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "list: next_cursor from the previous page.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 25,
+  "description": "list: views per page.",
+  "maximum": 100,
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. First observedv0.10.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, and the description adds that 'Every change is reversible with notion_undo' — genuine value that softens the destructive profile. It does not detail permissions or what the response looks like, but the annotation coverage lowers the bar and the reversibility note is the most important behavioral fact.

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?

Front-loaded with the action list and packed densely with concrete examples rather than filler. It is somewhat long but nearly every clause (types, placement, chart spec, reversibility) earns its place for a complex 8-parameter tool.

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?

For a complex tool with nested objects and no output schema, the description covers the action set, view types, placement modes, filter/sort/group references, chart specifics, and reversibility. It is largely self-sufficient, though it could note pagination or update semantics more explicitly.

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 75%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds concrete semantics beyond the schema, e.g. the chart spec example `{type: "column", x: "Owner", y: "count"}` or `y: "sum:Estimate"`, and group_by examples ('board by Status, dates by week'), which clarify usage beyond bare field names.

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?

States a specific resource (database views) with the full CRUD verb set (list, read, create, update, delete), which an agent can immediately distinguish from siblings like notion_query or notion_create_chart. It also enumerates the view types, making the scope of the tool concrete.

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?

Gives clear context for the `on` parameter's two placements (linked view on a page, widget on a dashboard) versus the default tab. It references notion_query for filter syntax and notion_undo for reversibility, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over siblings like notion_query or notion_create_chart.

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