Skip to main content
Glama
enesjakozh
yosider

cosense-mcp-server

by yosider
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Cosense MCP 서버

Cosense 용 MCP 서버.

도구

Cosense 페이지와 상호 작용하는 데 사용할 수 있는 도구는 다음과 같습니다.

  • get_page : 지정된 제목의 페이지를 검색합니다.

  • list_pages : 리소스에서 사용 가능한 페이지를 나열합니다.

  • search_pages : 지정된 쿼리 문자열을 포함하는 페이지를 검색합니다.

  • insert_lines : 페이지의 지정된 줄 뒤에 텍스트를 삽입합니다.

Related MCP server: MCP Tool

MCP 클라이언트 구성

다음 환경 변수가 필요합니다.

  • COSENSE_PROJECT_NAME : 프로젝트 이름

  • COSENSE_SID : 인증을 위한 세션 ID

    • 페이지에 쓰기 및 개인 페이지 읽기에 필요합니다.

    • 민감한 정보가 포함되어 있으므로 주의해서 다루십시오.

    • 자세한 내용은 scrapboxlab/connect.sid를 참조하세요.

npm 레지스트리에서 실행

JSR 레지스트리 구성

이 패키지는 JSR에 호스팅된 @cosense/std 및 @cosense/types 에 의존합니다. npx를 사용하기 전에 JSR 레지스트리를 전역으로 구성해야 합니다.

Linux/macOS의 경우:

지엑스피1

Windows(PowerShell)의 경우:

echo "@jsr:registry=https://npm.jsr.io" >> $env:USERPROFILE\.npmrc

또는 글로벌 설정을 수정하지 않으려면 대신 소스에서 실행하세요(아래 섹션 참조).

클라이언트 JSON 구성

JSR 레지스트리를 구성한 후 MCP 클라이언트를 구성하세요.

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "cosense-mcp-server": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "@yosider/cosense-mcp-server"],
      "env": {
        "COSENSE_PROJECT_NAME": "your_project_name",
        "COSENSE_SID": "your_sid"
      }
    }
  }
}

소스에서 실행

복제 및 빌드

git clone https://github.com/yosider/cosense-mcp-server.git
cd cosense-mcp-server
npm install
npm run build

클라이언트 JSON 구성

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "cosense-mcp-server": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "/path/to/cosense-mcp-server"],
      "env": {
        "COSENSE_PROJECT_NAME": "your_project_name",
        "COSENSE_SID": "your_sid"
      }
    }
  }
}

디버깅

MCP 서버는 stdio를 통해 통신하므로 디버깅이 어려울 수 있습니다. 패키지 스크립트로 제공되는 MCP Inspector를 사용하는 것이 좋습니다.

npm run inspect

검사기는 브라우저에서 디버깅 도구에 액세스할 수 있는 URL을 제공합니다.

감사의 말

이 프로젝트는 funwarioisii/cosense-mcp-server 에서 포크되었습니다.

Available Tools

4 tools
get_pageB

Get a page with the specified title from the Cosense project.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleYesTitle of the page

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, error handling for missing pages, or side effects. The term 'get' implies reading, but this is not explicitly stated.

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, concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any unnecessary words. It is well-structured and efficient.

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?

For a simple get operation with one parameter, the description is minimally adequate. However, it omits details about the return value and error conditions, which would be helpful since no output schema is provided.

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 has 100% coverage with a description for the 'title' parameter. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline for schema coverage.

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 'Get a page with the specified title from the Cosense project,' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like list_pages (listing) and search_pages (searching) by focusing on retrieval by title.

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 is provided on when to use this tool over siblings or when not to use it. The description merely defines the action without contextual usage instructions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

insert_linesA

Insert lines after the specified target line in a Cosense page. If the target line is not found, append to the end of the page.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleYesTitle of the page to modify
targetLineTextYesText of the line after which to insert new content. If not found, content will be appended to the end.
textYesText to insert. If you want to insert multiple lines, use \n for line breaks.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, but the description discloses the main action and the fallback behavior when target is not found. It does not mention potential side effects, error handling (e.g., page not found), or behavior with multiple matching target lines, but overall behavior is clear.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the main action, and contains no fluff. Every sentence adds essential information.

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?

For a simple insertion tool with three parameters, the description adequately covers the key behaviors (insert after target line, fallback append). It lacks mention of error cases (e.g., page not existing) or duplicate target lines, but these are not critical for basic understanding.

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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage for parameter descriptions. The tool description adds value by clarifying the fallback behavior of 'targetLineText' (append if not found), which is not in the schema. This enhances meaning beyond the schema alone.

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 the specific verb 'insert lines' and specifies the resource 'Cosense page' and location 'after the specified target line'. It clearly distinguishes from siblings (get_page, list_pages, search_pages) which are read-only tools.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage for inserting lines after a target or appending, but does not explicitly state when to use it vs. alternatives, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

list_pagesC

List Cosense pages in the project.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No parameters

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

Despite having no annotations, the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as being read-only, having side effects, or requiring authentication. The agent gets no safety context beyond the verb 'list.'

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, succinct clause with no extraneous words. It is front-loaded and perfectly concise for the tool's simplicity.

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 absence of an output schema and annotations, the description lacks information about return format, whether all pages are listed, or any ordering. This is insufficient for full autonomous use.

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?

With zero parameters and schema coverage at 100%, the description adds value by specifying the resource ('Cosense pages') and scope ('in the project'), which is not captured by the empty input schema.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states it lists Cosense pages in a project, using a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from siblings like get_page (single page) and search_pages (filtered). However, it does not specify if it returns all pages or just a subset, lacking slight scope detail.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_page, insert_lines, or search_pages. The agent must infer context from the name alone.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

search_pagesB

Search for pages containing the specified query string in the Cosense project.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesSearch query string (space separated)

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided. The description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, case sensitivity, pagination, or result limits. It only restates the function name.

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 with no redundant information. Highly concise and front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

Adequate for a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema. However, lacks details on return format, result ordering, or behavior for empty/missing queries.

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 coverage is 100% with one parameter described as 'Search query string (space separated)'. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the action (search) and the resource (pages containing query string) and specifies the context (Cosense project). It distinguishes from siblings like get_page (single page) and list_pages (list all) by using 'Search', but does not explicitly contrast.

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 this tool versus alternatives (e.g., list_pages or get_page). No mention of when-not-to-use or conditions like partial matching, pagination, or sorting.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 4 tool updatesv1.0.0
    • First observedget_page
    • First observedinsert_lines
    • First observedlist_pages
    • First observedsearch_pages
Deploy Server
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Scored across 4 tools

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a distinct purpose: get_page retrieves a specific page, insert_lines modifies page content, list_pages enumerates pages, and search_pages queries by text. No functional overlap.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with underscores (get_page, insert_lines, list_pages, search_pages), making them predictable and easy to understand.

Tool Count4/5

With 4 tools, the set is concise but covers essential operations for a Cosense server: reading, writing, listing, and searching. It is slightly minimal but appropriate for the domain.

Completeness3/5

The tools cover basic CRUD-like operations (get, insert, list, search) but lack delete or create functionality for pages explicitly. Insert_lines may create content but not a new page. Some gaps exist.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

Appeared in Searches