Skip to main content
Glama
rncz

Nextcloud Notes MCP Server

by rncz

edit_note

Update content in Markdown (.md) files stored in Nextcloud Notes by specifying filename and new text, replacing existing content.

Instructions

Edit a Markdown (.md) file, updating its content. Always overwrites the old file.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filenameYes
new_contentYes
categoryNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • The 'edit_note' tool handler. Decorated with @mcp.tool() to register it with the MCP server. Downloads to temp, overwrites remote file via WebDAV, uploads new content.
    @mcp.tool()
    def edit_note(filename: str, new_content: str, category: str | None = None) -> str:
        """
        Edit a Markdown (.md) file, updating its content. Always overwrites the old file.
        """
        full_path = f"/Notes/{category}/{filename}" if category else f"/Notes/{filename}"
        tmp_path = os.path.join(tempfile.gettempdir(), next(tempfile._get_candidate_names()) + ".tmp")
    
        with open(tmp_path, "w", encoding="utf-8") as f:
            f.write(new_content)
    
        # Remove existing file if it exists
        if client.check(remote_path=full_path):
            client.clean(remote_path=full_path)
    
        # Upload new content
        client.upload_sync(remote_path=full_path, local_path=tmp_path)
        os.remove(tmp_path)
    
        return f"Note updated successfully: {full_path}"
  • Registration of the 'edit_note' tool using the FastMCP decorator.
    @mcp.tool()
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the destructive behavior ('Always overwrites the old file'), which is critical for a mutation tool. However, it lacks details on permissions, error handling, or response format, leaving significant behavioral gaps.

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?

The description is extremely concise with two sentences that are front-loaded and waste no words. Every phrase adds value, making it efficient and well-structured.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (mutation with 3 parameters), no annotations, and an output schema (which reduces need to describe returns), the description is incomplete. It covers the basic action and destructive nature but misses parameter explanations, usage context, and error handling, making it minimally adequate but with clear gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

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 mentions 'Markdown (.md) file' and 'content', hinting at 'filename' and 'new_content', but doesn't explain 'category' or provide any parameter-specific details beyond what's implied. This is insufficient for 3 parameters with no schema documentation.

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 description clearly states the action ('Edit'), resource ('a Markdown (.md) file'), and effect ('updating its content'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'create_note' or 'rename_note'. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'read_note' or 'delete_note' beyond the verb, which keeps it from a perfect score.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides minimal guidance: 'Always overwrites the old file' implies a destructive update, but it doesn't specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'create_note' for new files or 'rename_note' for renaming. No explicit when-not-to-use or prerequisite context is given.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/rncz/nextcloud-notes-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server