NoteKing MCP

noteking_toggle_pin

Toggle a note's pinned status on the NoteKing sidebar to keep important notes at the top or release them from the pinned list.

Instructions

Toggle the pinned status of a note on the NoteKing sidebar

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "noteking_toggle_pin"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Unique identifier of the note whose pin status to toggle

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 14, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing beyond the action itself. It does not state that repeated calls flip the state back (non-idempotent effect), what the response contains (e.g., the new pinned value), or whether any permission or note-existence constraints apply.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately sized for a one-parameter tool, though the space saved could have been used for the behavioral detail the definition lacks.

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 one-parameter mutation with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the core action but omits the two things an agent most needs: the resulting state after toggling and how this differs from the pin-reordering sibling. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 coverage is 100% for the single 'id' parameter, including a description and an exclusiveMinimum constraint, so the schema already does the heavy lifting. The tool description adds no further meaning about the identifier, which is acceptable at this coverage level but not additive.

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 gives a specific verb ('Toggle') and resource ('pinned status of a note') plus the surface it affects ('NoteKing sidebar'), which is enough to distinguish it from CRUD siblings like noteking_update_note. It stops short of naming the closely related noteking_reorder_pinned, so the boundary between flipping a pin and reordering pins is left implicit.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no statement of prerequisites, and no mention of the alternative noteking_reorder_pinned, which an agent could easily confuse with this tool. The agent must infer the usage context entirely from the verb and the sidebar mention.

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

Deploy Server