Skip to main content
Glama

notebook.create

Create a new empty notebook in NotebookLM, returning the URL and ID for immediate use. Optionally set an initial title.

Instructions

Create a brand-new empty notebook directly in NotebookLM (no pre-existing URL required, unlike add_notebook which only registers an already-created notebook into the library).

Returns { notebook_url, notebook_id, name_applied, actual_name, message }.

  • notebook_url / notebook_id: always the FINAL UUID-based URL (the tool waits past the /notebook/creating/c transitional URL).

  • name_applied (boolean): whether the name parameter actually took effect. false means the notebook is still "Untitled notebook" — rename via UI if needed.

  • actual_name (string): the title observed on the notebook after creation.

Typical workflow:

  1. create_notebook({ name?: "my-research" }){ notebook_url, notebook_id, name_applied, actual_name }

  2. add_source({ notebook_url, source_type: "url", source: "https://..." })

  3. ask_question({ notebook_url, question: "..." })

Note: Requires authentication. Run setup_auth first if not authenticated.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoOptional initial title for the notebook. NotebookLM will auto-name it if omitted (usually "Untitled notebook"). The title can be edited later via the UI.
show_browserNoShow browser window during creation. Default: false (headless).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
successYesWhether the tool call succeeded.
dataNoThe tool payload on success. The exact shape depends on the tool.
errorNoHuman-readable error message, present only when success is false.
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes beyond annotations by detailing the waiting behavior for transitional URLs, the possibility that the name may not apply (name_applied boolean), and the exact return structure. Annotations indicate write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-idempotent behavior, which aligns with the description. No contradictions.

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 well-structured with a clear purpose statement, return value breakdown, workflow example, and authentication note. While slightly verbose, each section adds value. It is front-loaded with the main action and contrasts with alternatives. Could be trimmed slightly for conciseness.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the complexity of notebook creation and the presence of an output schema, the description provides comprehensive context: explains transitional URL handling, boolean flags, and typical usage flow. It covers authentication and alternative usage, making it fully complete for an agent to use correctly.

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

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema already provides descriptions for both parameters ('name' and 'show_browser') with 100% coverage. The description adds minimal extra parameter context, mostly reinforcing that name is optional and editable. The detailed output explanation does not directly enhance parameter semantics, leading to a baseline score of 3.

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's purpose: 'Create a brand-new empty notebook directly in NotebookLM'. It distinguishes itself from 'add_notebook' which only registers an existing notebook, providing a clear verb+resource definition. This separates it effectively from sibling tools like 'library.add'.

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 includes explicit authentication requirements and a typical workflow (create, add_source, ask_question). It references an alternative tool ('add_notebook') for context. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use this tool, the provided workflow and auth note offer clear guidance.

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/roomi-fields/notebooklm-mcp'

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