Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
openninoor

noteful-mcp

by openninoor
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

clean_copy

Inserts a neat handwritten rewrite immediately after a source page, converting cleaned, structured markdown into study notes or classic notebook pages.

Instructions

Clean copy: insert a neat handwritten rewrite right after the given page. First call render_page and read the messy page yourself; then pass the cleaned, well structured content as markdown. look: 'study' (default: composed study notes, docs/STYLE.md) or 'classic' (plain notebook). theme: light (ivory page) for summaries | dark (black page, neon) for question/tree pages. Study markdown, one block per line: '# THE CARDIAC CYCLE' thick title with shadow, the ** word in colour (add ':heart:' / sun, star, atom, drop, bolt, cloud, leaf for a doodle); '# SOLAR & TERRESTRIAL // RADIATION' two-line title on a marker band; 'subtitle' line; '## Section' or '## SMOOTH muscle' coloured caps on a rule (next accent each time); '### Label'; body is mixed case: 'term' colour, '==phrase==' highlighter ('=={pink}..=='), '[[tag]]' pill, '((detail))' grey; items '- ', '* ' star, '-> ' arrow, '1. ' circled; '> [sky] TITLE: text ((detail))' card; '>> A: text || B: text' cards side by side; '!columns 55' ... '!col' ... '!end' two columns (put a !draw on one side); '!zone [sky]' ... '!end' pale full-width band; '!sticky [yellow] TITLE: text'; '!stat 30 reflected (albedo)'; '!map TOPIC | question?' then '- BRANCH.' and indented ' - leaf' lines (tree, best on dark); '!draw [width]' '!end'; '---'; '\pagebreak'. Colours: coral, amber, sky, purple, teal, pink; keep 2-3 per page. Fill the page (~90 %): a diagram + text in columns, cards, a zone with stats and a sticky. Classic markdown: '# ' '## ' headings, '- ' bullets, '[ ] ' checkboxes, '> ' box, '{color:red} ' line colour, '==text==', '!tape mint'. paper: dot|grid|ruled|blank. font: patrick (default), caveat, readability, felix, allure, elfin, nixish. hand: neat | natural | messy. pen: fineliner (study default) | ballpoint. Science: Greek letters, T^4, m^{-2}, CO_2, → ⇄ ≈ ± ° work. Read an example first: example_pages. Drawings (organs, cells, models, circuits, graphs): write a plain SVG with a viewBox 400-650 wide. It is scaled to the width given ('!draw 480' = 480 page units, the page is 1091 wide; inside '!columns' it is capped by the column), so labels need font-size 18-22 in that viewBox to stay readable. Outlines: stroke="#1f2233" stroke-width="2" become hand-drawn ink. Fills become pastel highlighter colouring, even dark ones, so separate stacked parts with outlines, not with darker fills; later shapes cover earlier ones (draw the organ, then its parts). Labels: become handwriting, placed outside the drawing and joined to the part with a . Use curves (C/Q/A) for organic shapes; keep it schematic like a textbook sketch. See the drawing examples.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
inkNoink
penNo
fontNopatrick
handNoneat
lookNostudy
pageYes
pathYes
paperNoruled
themeNolight
accentNoblue
markdownYes
open_in_notefulNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; it does disclose that the tool inserts a new page immediately after the target page, implying a document mutation and page reindexing. It says nothing about permissions, whether the original page is preserved, failure/error behavior, or the side effect of the default open_in_noteful=true. Moderate disclosure for a mutation tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose and workflow are correctly front-loaded in the first two clauses, which is good. But the remainder is a single dense run-on block cramming the markdown DSL, styling options, and SVG drawing rules together with no headings or list structure, making it hard to scan for a specific directive.

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?

For a 12-parameter, no-annotation, no-output-schema tool, the description covers the hard part (the markdown/DSL grammar) thoroughly and even cautions about SVG scaling and fill behavior. Gaps remain around three undocumented parameters and the absence of any statement about what the tool returns or how the original page is handled.

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 0% across 12 parameters, so the description must compensate, and it largely does: look, theme, paper, font, hand, pen are all given value sets and defaults, and markdown's grammar is exhaustively documented. However, `ink`, `accent`, and `open_in_noteful` are never mentioned, and `path`/`page` semantics are only implied ("the given page").

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 opening clause states a specific verb and effect: "insert a neat handwritten rewrite right after the given page." That distinguishes it from the rendering/inspection siblings (render_page, page_ink) and from write_on_page. It never names a sibling to route away from, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Explicit workflow is given: "First call render_page and read the messy page yourself; then pass the cleaned, well structured content as markdown," plus "Read an example first: example_pages." These name real siblings and the order to call them in. No when-not-to-use condition or comparison against write_on_page/design_page, so not a 5.

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