Create or update OKF Markdown wiki notes for decisions, action items, or speaker profiles in a local OneMira vault, keeping meeting knowledge current.
Create or update an OKF Markdown Wiki note (decisions, action items, or speaker profile) in the local OneMira vault.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | Relative Markdown path inside the OneMira vault | |
| content | Yes | Updated Markdown content with YAML frontmatter and wikilinks |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that this is a mutation in a local vault, but does not state whether an existing note is overwritten, whether missing directories are created, permission requirements, conflict handling, or error behavior.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted wording. It states the action, resource, content type, and location efficiently.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is missing critical behavioral details: overwrite semantics, create-versus-update resolution, and failure modes. The schema covers both parameters well, but that does not compensate for the missing operational context.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds some context by naming the content types and vault location, but does not clarify slug resolution, frontmatter handling, or wikilink expectations beyond what the schema already says.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a specific verb+resource: create or update an OKF Markdown Wiki note in the local OneMira vault, and names example note types (decisions, action items, speaker profile). It is clearly distinguishable from mira_wiki_read, though it does not explicitly contrast the two.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no conditions for choosing create versus update, and no alternatives or prerequisites. The note-type examples imply usage but do not state when this tool should be selected over mira_wiki_read or other siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.