Skip to main content
Glama
kj455

MCP Kibela

by kj455

kibela_get_note_from_path

Retrieve content from a specific Kibela note by providing its path. Enables AI assistants to access and utilize stored information efficiently.

Instructions

Get note content by note path

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesNote path (e.g. /notes/123)

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function for the kibela_get_note_from_path tool. It validates the path argument, fetches the note using GraphQL, and returns a formatted text content response.
      handler: async (args) => {
        if (!args.path) {
          throw new Error('Note path is required')
        }
    
        const response = await getNoteFromPath({ path: args.path })
    
        if (!response.noteFromPath) {
          throw new Error('Note not found')
        }
    
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: 'text',
              text: JSON.stringify(response.noteFromPath, null, 2),
            },
          ],
        }
      },
    }
  • Schema definition for the tool, including name, description, and input schema specifying the required 'path' parameter.
    tool: {
      name: 'kibela_get_note_from_path',
      description: 'Get note content by note path',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          path: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'Note path (e.g. /notes/123)',
          },
        },
        required: ['path'],
      },
    },
  • Registration of the getNoteFromPathTool under the name 'kibela_get_note_from_path' in the central toolDefinitions object.
    kibela_get_note_from_path: getNoteFromPathTool,
  • Helper function that executes the GraphQL query to fetch note by path, used by the tool handler.
    export async function getNoteFromPath(variables: GetNoteFromPathVariables): Promise<GetNoteFromPathResponse> {
      return gqlRequest(getNoteFromPathQuery, variables)
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It states what the tool does but doesn't disclose traits like whether it's read-only, requires authentication, has rate limits, returns structured data, or handles errors. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its operation.

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?

The description is extremely concise with a single sentence ('Get note content by note path') that front-loads the core functionality. Every word earns its place, with no redundant information or fluff. It efficiently communicates the essential purpose without unnecessary elaboration.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool that retrieves content. It doesn't explain what 'note content' includes (e.g., text, metadata, format), how results are returned, or potential limitations. For a read operation with no structured output documentation, more context is needed to understand the tool fully.

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?

The description adds marginal value beyond the input schema, which has 100% coverage. It clarifies that 'path' refers to 'note path' and provides an example ('/notes/123'), but the schema already describes it as 'Note path (e.g. /notes/123)'. With high schema coverage, the baseline is 3, and the description doesn't significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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 'Get note content by note path' clearly states the action (get), resource (note content), and key mechanism (by note path). It distinguishes from siblings like 'kibela_get_my_notes' (user-specific) and 'kibela_search_notes' (search-based), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'kibela_get_note_content' which likely uses a different identifier. The purpose is specific but could be more precise about sibling differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, when-not scenarios, or compare to siblings like 'kibela_get_note_content' (which might use an ID instead of path) or 'kibela_search_notes' (for broader queries). Usage is implied by the name but not explicitly stated.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Related Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/kj455/mcp-kibela'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server