Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
notes-mcp

notes-mcp

by sheimaz
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Create note

create_note

Create a structured note with a title, markdown body, and optional tags to add information to your personal knowledge base.

Instructions

Create a new note with a title, markdown body, and optional tags.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "title": "<title>",
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "create_note"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYesNote content (markdown allowed)
tagsNoOptional list of tags
titleYesShort title for the note

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
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 of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and parameters but does not mention what the tool returns, whether the operation is idempotent, potential side effects, or required permissions. For a mutation tool, this is a notable gap.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the core action and includes the key parameters. Every word earns its place, with no redundant information.

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?

The tool is simple (3 params, no output schema, no annotations), and the schema covers all parameters, but the description lacks any information about return values or error conditions. Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description should provide a bit more context to be fully complete.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters. The description merely restates them ('title, markdown body, and optional tags') without adding any deeper meaning or usage details, earning the baseline score.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Create a new note') and clearly distinguishes from siblings like update_note, delete_note, and get_note. It unambiguously states the action and the primary inputs.

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 clearly implies the tool is for creating new notes, which differentiates it from updating or deleting existing notes. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, but the verb 'create' provides sufficient context.

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