liseur-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

list_highlights

Retrieve highlights, notes, and bookmarks from your account. Pass a book ID to filter annotations for that specific book, or omit it to see all.

Instructions

List highlights, notes and bookmarks.

    With book_id: the annotations of that book. The first call joins the
    catalog book to your reading work — a per-user mapping; nothing shared
    changes. Without book_id: every live annotation on the account, each
    carrying its work_id.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`book_id`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description discloses a notable behavioral trait: the first call with book_id joins the catalog book to the user's reading work, creating a per-user mapping without changing shared data. This goes beyond the schema and annotations (which are absent), providing useful context about side effects and scope.

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?

The description is compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, then explains the two modes. The sentence about the per-user mapping is slightly dense but earns its place as important behavioral context. No wasted words.

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?

Given the tool has an output schema and only two optional parameters, the description covers the key decision (book_id vs no book_id) and the important side-effect behavior. It doesn't mention pagination or rate limits, but the output schema likely covers return structure. Adequate for a list tool.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the meaning of book_id (filter to that book's annotations) and the default behavior without it (all live annotations). It doesn't detail limit, but limit is self-explanatory and has a default. This is strong compensation for the schema gap.

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 lists highlights, notes, and bookmarks, and distinguishes two modes: with book_id (annotations of that book) and without (all live annotations on the account). This is specific and differentiates it from siblings like list_books or get_book.

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?

The description explains when to use each mode: with book_id for a specific book's annotations, without for all account annotations. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to choose correctly.

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

Deploy Server