Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SiYuan MCP Server

SiYuan MCP Server

by xgq18237
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

get_database

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch paginated database entries from SiYuan Note using a database ID. Allows search within database, specify view, and create database if not exists.

Instructions

分页渲染数据库

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": {
      "avID": "<avID>"
    },
    "name": "get_database"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
avIDYes思源块、文档、笔记本或数据库 ID
pageNo页码
queryNo数据库内搜索词
viewIDNo思源块、文档、笔记本或数据库 ID
blockIDNo思源块、文档、笔记本或数据库 ID
pageSizeNo每页数量
createIfNotExistNo数据库文件缺失时是否创建

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.1

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., what happens if the database doesn't exist, or how pagination works). It does not contradict annotations.

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 description is a single short phrase, which is under-specified. It sacrifices substance for brevity and does not effectively earn its place with meaningful information.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool has 7 parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the return value, how parameters interact, or what 'render' means in practice.

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?

All 7 parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the description does not need to add extensive param info. However, it adds no extra meaning beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description '分页渲染数据库' indicates pagination rendering of a database, but it does not clearly specify what exactly the tool returns (e.g., rows, views) or how it differs from related tools like get_database_keys. The purpose is somewhat clear but lacks specificity.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as get_database_keys or append_database_rows. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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