Skip to main content
Glama

ainote

by io.github.seunghan91

list_papers

Read-onlyIdempotent

List notes/papers from AI Note. Supports keyword search across title and content, category filtering, pagination, and sorting. Returns id/title/content_preview/category_id/created_at. Use this when the user asks 'find my note about X', 'what did I write on Y', or wants to search their knowledge base.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum number of papers to return (default: 25, max: 200)
offsetNoNumber to skip for pagination (default: 0)
searchNoKeyword to match in paper title or content (case-insensitive partial match)
sort_byNoSort field (default: updated_at)
sort_orderNoSort order (default: desc)
category_idNoFilter by category UUID
source_typeNoFilter by source type (e.g., 'manual', 'youtube', 'url', 'clipboard')
paper_category_idNoFilter by paper-specific folder UUID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / $schema
      Added value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds return field details (id/title/content_preview/category_id/created_at) and mentions supported features, which is useful and consistent with annotations.

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, front-loaded with the purpose, then enriched with concrete use-case examples. Every word earns its place; no filler or redundancy.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by listing return fields. It covers the tool's functionality, use cases, and is sufficiently complete for a read-only list operation with well-documented parameters. Slight gap: doesn't mention default pagination or sort order, but those are in schema defaults.

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 each of the 8 parameters fully described, so baseline 3 applies. The description mentions capabilities like search and sorting but adds no new parametric semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 tool lists notes/papers from AI Note, with specific capabilities like keyword search, category filtering, pagination, and sorting. This distinguishes it from other read-oriented sibling tools by naming the exact resource (AI Note notes).

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 provides explicit use-case examples ('find my note about X', 'what did I write on Y') and indicates when to search the knowledge base. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is unambiguous.

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

All ainote toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools clearly target distinct resources (tasks, docs, graph, sync, env_sync, handoffs, judgments, projects, vault). A few pairs could confuse, like sync_push vs vault_sync (which has a push action) and env_sync_write vs env_sync_txn_push, but descriptions mostly clarify boundaries.

Naming Consistency3/5

Names are predominantly snake_case with a noun_verb pattern (e.g., sync_push, task_write), but there are notable inconsistencies: plural/singular mismatches (dev_docs_read vs dev_doc_write, tasks_read vs task_write), verb-first names (list_papers, get_setup_guide, judgment_submit), and a dotted sub-namespace (env_sync.secret_pull) mixed with flat names (env_sync_txn_push).

Tool Count2/5

35 tools is a large surface for a personal note/sync server. While it spans many domains (auth, tasks, docs, sync, env_sync, graph, etc.), the sheer number feels heavy and likely overwhelms agents with too many choices, especially when several tools are consolidated sub-action surfaces.

Completeness3/5

Most domains have reasonable CRUD coverage (tasks, dev docs, graph, sync, env_sync, vault). However, noticeable gaps exist: memory has no write tool (only read), papers only support listing (no create/update/delete), assumptions have write but no dedicated read or delete, and judgment is effectively submit-and-list only.

Resources