Skip to main content
Glama

note_append

Append text to a task or project's note in OmniFocus. Adds a newline between existing content and new text. Use idempotency key to prevent duplicates on retries.

Instructions

Append text to the plain-text note on a task or project. Adds a newline between existing content and the new text unless the note is empty. Do not use to replace the note entirely; prefer note_set instead. Pass idempotency_key to coalesce retries — append is not naturally idempotent and replays without a key duplicate the text. Returns { updated: true, id, targetKind, name, note } — name is the parent task/project's display name (captured from the same read that fetched the existing note) so the agent can describe the change without a follow-up read; note is the full content after appending. Side effects: writes to OmniFocus, sets meta.syncPending = true. Call sync_trigger when you need the change to appear on other devices. Example: note_append({ targetKind: "task", id: "abc123", text: "Follow up next week" })

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesPersistent ID of the task or project. Get task IDs from task_list; project IDs from project_list.
textYesText to append. A newline separator is inserted before the text if a note exists.
targetKindYesThe kind of OmniFocus item whose note to append to.
idempotency_keyNoIdempotency key for retry-safe appends. `append` is not naturally idempotent — replays without a key multiply the appended text. Identical subsequent calls with the same key within the TTL window replay the original envelope with meta.idempotentReplay = true instead of appending again. See docs/idempotency.md.
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description fully bears the burden. It discloses side effects (writes to OmniFocus, sets meta.syncPending = true), retry behavior via idempotency_key, and output structure. However, it does not mention authorization requirements or whether the operation is reversible, which would elevate transparency further.

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 a single dense paragraph but remains efficient. It front-loads the core purpose and then covers guidelines, side effects, output, and example. Could be improved by using bullet points or breaking into sections, but it is not overly verbose.

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?

Given no output schema, the description appropriately explains the return value. It covers side effects and suggests sync_trigger for propagation. All four parameters are addressed. It could mention error conditions (e.g., target not found), but overall it is sufficiently complete for a mutation tool with idempotency handling.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining the newline insertion behavior, the purpose of idempotency_key for retry safety, and the return structure. It also provides an example. This additional context justifies a 4.

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 verb 'Append' and resource 'plain-text note on a task or project', and explicitly distinguishes from the sibling 'note_set' by saying 'Do not use to replace the note entirely; prefer note_set instead.' This makes the purpose specific and unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description provides explicit when-to-use ('Append text'), when-not-to-use (avoid for replacement, prefer note_set), and a specific use case for retry safety with idempotency_key. It also includes a clear example, offering complete guidance for correct invocation.

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/torsday/omnifocus-mcp'

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