Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SiYuan MCP Server

SiYuan MCP Server

by xgq18237
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

rename_doc

Renames a document in the specified notebook using its storage path. Provide the new title and document path to update the document's name.

Instructions

按存储路径重命名文档

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": {
      "notebook": "<notebook>",
      "path": "<path>",
      "title": "<title>"
    },
    "name": "rename_doc"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes文档存储路径
titleYes新标题
notebookYes思源块、文档、笔记本或数据库 ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.1

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate not readOnly (write) and not destructive. Description adds no behavioral details beyond rename action; no contradiction.

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?

Single sentence, no verbose content; all information is essential.

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?

Minimal description for a write tool. Lacks return behavior, error details, or when to prefer over rename_doc_by_id; schema covers params but tool still feels underspecified.

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 covers all 3 parameters with descriptions. Description adds no parameter meaning beyond 'rename by storage path'; baseline 3 applies.

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?

Description '按存储路径重命名文档' clearly states action (rename), resource (document), and method (by storage path). Distinguishes from sibling rename_doc_by_id.

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?

No guidance on when to use vs. alternatives. Sibling rename_doc_by_id exists but not mentioned; context for choosing between them is absent.

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