Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
openninoor

noteful-mcp

by openninoor
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

create_notebook

Generate a natural handwriting-ink notebook from structured markdown, with study-note layouts, cards, themes, and SVG diagrams for light or dark pages.

Instructions

Create a new notebook whose pages are written in natural handwriting ink. 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
handNo
lookNostudy
seedNo
sizeNo
paperNodot
themeNolight
titleYes
accentNoblue
markdownYes
open_in_notefulNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and delivers unusual behavioral detail: fills are flattened to pastel highlighter, later shapes occlude earlier ones, and SVG strokes are converted to hand-drawn ink. It omits side effects an agent would care about, notably what open_in_noteful does and where the created notebook lives, which keeps it off a 5.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The bulk is a semicolon-chained markdown/DSL reference crammed into a single run-on block, which is poorly front-loaded and far larger than a tool description should be. The content is high-value but belongs in a referenced doc; as prose structure it is almost unusable for scanning.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 13-parameter creation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the hard part (page markdown grammar and drawing conventions) but is silent on creation side effects, the open_in_noteful toggle, and what the call returns. Adequate for authoring content, incomplete for invoking the tool safely.

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%, so the description must document 13 parameters, and it substantively does for look, theme, paper, font, hand, pen, and the entire markdown dialect. It leaves ink, seed, size, accent, open_in_noteful, and title unexplained, so roughly a third of the surface is still bare.

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 first sentence states a specific verb and resource ('Create a new notebook') plus the distinguishing medium: pages in natural handwriting ink. It does not, however, distinguish itself from page-producing siblings like design_page, render_page, or design_mockup, so an agent must infer the boundary.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives real conditional guidance for parameter choices ('look: study ... or classic', 'theme: light for summaries | dark for question/tree pages') and points at example_pages to read first. What it never says is when to call this tool instead of siblings such as add_pages or design_page, so tool-level routing is left implicit.

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