Skip to main content
Glama

trash_note

Move a note to trash in Bear Notes using its unique identifier. This tool helps users manage notes by removing unwanted items from their workspace.

Instructions

Move a note to trash

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
note_idYesThe unique identifier of the note (ZUNIQUEIDENTIFIER)

Implementation Reference

  • The core implementation of the trash_note tool, which constructs a Bear x-callback-url and opens it.
    def trash_note(note_id: str) -> dict[str, str]:
        """
        Move a note to trash.
    
        Args:
            note_id: The unique identifier of the note (ZUNIQUEIDENTIFIER)
    
        Returns:
            Dictionary with operation result
        """
        params = {"id": note_id}
    
        query_string = urllib.parse.urlencode(params)
        url = f"bear://x-callback-url/trash?{query_string}"
    
        return _open_bear_url(url)
  • Registration of the trash_note tool in the MCP server list.
        name="trash_note",
        description="Move a note to trash",
        inputSchema={
            "type": "object",
            "properties": {
                "note_id": {
                    "type": "string",
                    "description": "The unique identifier of the note (ZUNIQUEIDENTIFIER)",
                },
            },
            "required": ["note_id"],
        },
    ),
  • Tool call handler logic for trash_note in the MCP server.
    elif name == "trash_note":
        if not isinstance(arguments, dict) or "note_id" not in arguments:
            raise ValueError("Missing required argument: note_id")
    
        result = trash_note(note_id=arguments["note_id"])
        return [TextContent(type="text", text=str(result))]
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Move to trash' implies a destructive/mutative operation that likely requires permissions and may be irreversible, but the description doesn't state this explicitly. It doesn't mention whether the note remains recoverable, what happens to linked tags/text, or any rate limits/errors.

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 a single, direct sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource. Every word earns its place without redundancy or fluff.

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?

For a destructive operation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address behavioral aspects like permissions, reversibility, side effects, or response format. Given the mutation nature and sibling context (archive/unarchive), more guidance is needed for safe agent use.

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 description coverage is 100% with one parameter fully documented, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter context beyond what the schema provides (note_id requirement). It doesn't explain format expectations or validation rules for the identifier.

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 clearly states the action ('Move') and resource ('a note') with the specific outcome ('to trash'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'archive_note' and 'unarchive_note' by specifying trash rather than archive, but doesn't explicitly contrast with deletion or other destructive operations. The purpose is specific and unambiguous.

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 like 'archive_note' or potential deletion tools. It doesn't mention prerequisites, consequences, or recovery options. The agent must infer usage from the name alone without contextual help.

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

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/maxim-ist/mcp-bear'

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