Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Voicenotes MCP

Voicenotes MCP

by mayankbohradev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

vn_update_note

DestructiveIdempotent

Update a note's title, tags, or transcript. Tags replace the full list; omit tags to preserve existing ones.

Instructions

Update a note's title, tags, and/or transcript. tags REPLACES the full list; omitting tags PRESERVES existing ones (e.g. when editing only the title/transcript).

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": "vn_update_note"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesNote id
titleNoNew title
tagsNoFull replacement tag list (omit to keep existing)
transcriptNoCorrected transcript text

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate destructive and idempotent nature. Description adds key behavioral info about tags replacement. Does not mention side effects or permissions, but annotations cover basic safety profile.

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?

Two sentences, efficient, front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Adequate for a 4-parameter update tool with no output schema. Covers the key nuance on tags. Could mention idempotency or response, but not essential given annotations and schema coverage.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds value by clarifying the tags replacement/preservation semantics beyond the schema's 'Full replacement tag list'.

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?

The description clearly states the tool updates a note, specifying the fields: title, tags, and/or transcript. It distinguishes from siblings like vn_create_note and vn_delete_note.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on tags behavior: replacement vs preservation on omission. Includes an example scenario. Could further contrast with vn_update_tag but sufficiently helps decision-making.

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