Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
m4yk3ldev

NotebookLM MCP

by m4yk3ldev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

List notebooks

notebook_list
Read-onlyIdempotent

List your NotebookLM notebooks (owned and shared) to find a notebook_id by title, then use that ID for further actions.

Instructions

List the user's NotebookLM notebooks, owned and shared. Returns each notebook's id, title, emoji, sources (id, title, type), ownership and timestamps, plus a count. Start here to find a notebook_id by title; once you have the id, notebook_get reads one notebook. There is no paging: if count equals max_results, call again with a higher max_results.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
max_resultsNoMaximum number of notebooks to return (default 100)

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countYesNumber of notebooks returned
statusYes
messageNoHuman-readable outcome or next step
notebooksYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.5.0
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "count": {
+      "description": "Number of notebooks returned",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "message": {
+      "description": "Human-readable outcome or next step",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "notebooks": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "created_at": {
+            "description": "ISO 8601 timestamp",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "emoji": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "id": {
+            "description": "Notebook ID",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "is_shared": {
+            "type": "boolean"
+          },
+          "modified_at": {
+            "description": "ISO 8601 timestamp",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "ownership": {
+            "enum": [
+              "mine",
+              "shared"
+            ],
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "sources": {
+            "items": {
+              "additionalProperties": false,
+              "properties": {
+                "id": {
+                  "description": "Source ID",
+                  "type": "string"
+                },
+                "title": {
+                  "type": "string"
+                },
+                "type": {
+                  "description": "web_page, youtube, pasted_text, pdf, google_docs, google_slides_sheets, ... or unknown",
+                  "type": "string"
+                }
+              },
+              "required": [
+                "id",
+                "title",
+                "type"
+              ],
+              "type": "object"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          },
+          "title": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "id",
+          "title",
+          "emoji",
+          "sources",
+          "is_shared",
+          "ownership",
+          "created_at",
+          "modified_at"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "const": "success",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "status",
+    "notebooks",
+    "count"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.4.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / max_results / description
      Previous value: -"Maximum notebooks to return (default 100)"New value: +"Maximum number of notebooks to return (default 100)"
  3. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld/no-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. What the description adds beyond that is genuinely useful: the scope of results (owned and shared) and, critically, the non-obvious paging behavior keyed off count vs max_results. It stops short of describing ordering or total-availability limits, so not a 5.

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?

Three sentences, each carrying distinct load: contents returned, routing to the sibling tool, and the paging caveat. Front-loaded with the core purpose and no filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

An output schema exists, so field enumeration is technically redundant but harmless, and the description's real gaps to close — result scope and the absence of paging — are both addressed. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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% and the single parameter (max_results) is documented, so the baseline is 3. The description earns extra credit by explaining the semantic consequence of max_results — the result set is truncated with no paging cursor, and count == max_results signals more data. That is meaning the schema alone does not convey.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('List the user's NotebookLM notebooks, owned and shared') and it explicitly distinguishes itself from notebook_get by stating 'Start here to find a notebook_id by title; once you have the id, notebook_get reads one notebook.' An agent can pick between the two without opening either schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives explicit entry-point guidance ('Start here to find a notebook_id by title') and names the natural follow-up tool and its condition. It also covers the retry condition ('if count equals max_results, call again with a higher max_results'), leaving little to inference.

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