Skip to main content
Glama
deenesjakoruzh
9Ninety

MCP Notes

by 9Ninety
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Hybrid

📝 Заметки МКП

Изображение обложки MCP Notes

✨ Обзор

MCP Notes Server — это простое приложение для создания заметок, созданное на основе протокола MCP. Его цель — дать пользователям возможность записывать и просматривать сложные заметки и задачи, используя модели ИИ, такие как запись личных мыслей, заметок, вдохновений и идей. Он не полагается на создание файлов проекта, позволяя пользователям записывать любой контент, не делая его публичным в рамках проекта.

Этот проект включает в себя два сервера: сервер Node.js, использующий протокол контекста модели (MCP) для управления заметками на основе искусственного интеллекта, и веб-сервер, предоставляющий удобный интерфейс для ручного взаимодействия с вашими заметками.

Примечание: Для этого проекта требуется DynamoDB для хранения заметок. Для его использования вам понадобится учетная запись AWS. AWS предлагает щедрый бесплатный уровень для DynamoDB, что делает его пригодным для частого личного использования без каких-либо затрат.

Related MCP server: Anki MCP Server

🎯 Основные характеристики

  • 🖥️ Архитектура с двумя серверами: сервер MCP для управления заметками на основе искусственного интеллекта и веб-сервер для пользовательского интерфейса

  • 🤖 Ведение заметок с помощью ИИ: записывайте мысли, идеи и задачи с помощью взаимодействия с ИИ

  • 🗂️ Комплексное управление заметками: создание, составление списков, извлечение, обновление и удаление заметок с помощью ИИ или веб-интерфейса

  • 📋 Надежное хранилище: безопасное и эффективное хранилище заметок с помощью AWS DynamoDB

  • 🔐 Гибкая аутентификация: поддержка учетных данных AWS через строки подключения или переменные среды

  • 📝 Независимость от проекта: храните личные заметки, не влияя на файлы или структуру проекта

🤖 Поддержка модели

Вы можете использовать любую модель, которая поддерживает вызовы функций, пока ваш клиент поддерживает MCP. Следующие модели были протестированы и подтвердили свою работоспособность:

  • Клод 3.5 Серия

  • Серии Gemini 1.5 и 2.0

  • Серия ГПТ-4

  • Мистраль Большой

  • Грок-2

  • DeepSeek Чат

🛠️ Установка

Рекомендовано

Запустите напрямую с помощью npx или bunx , см. примеры ниже.

Альтернатива

  1. Убедитесь, что в вашей системе установлен Node.js.

  2. Клонируйте этот репозиторий и установите зависимости с помощью: npm install

  3. Настройте Claude Desktop или любые другие инструменты, как показано ниже.

⚙️ Конфигурация учетных данных

Строка подключения

dynamodb://<access_key>:<secret_key>@<region>/<table>

Пример: dynamodb://AKIAXXXXXXXX:SKXXXXXXXX@us-east-1/mcp-notes

Переменные среды

  1. Экспортируйте AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID и AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY .

  2. Укажите информацию о подключении без учетных данных в URI: dynamodb://us-east-1/mcp-notes

🤖 Интеграция с инструментами

Клод Десктоп

Добавьте этот фрагмент в claude_desktop_config.json :

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "mcp-notes": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "-p",
        "mcp-notes",
        "mcp-notes-server",
        "--dynamodb",
        "dynamodb://access_key:secret_key@region/table"
      ]
    }
  }
}

или файл на локальных дисках:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "mcp-notes": {
      "command": "node",
      "args": [
        "file://path/to/notes-mcp-server.js",
        "--dynamodb",
        "dynamodb://access_key:secret_key@region/table"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Коди

Примечание: в настоящее время Cody имеет ограниченную поддержку сервера MCP.
Он допускает только одно подключение к серверу и не может делать вызовы инструментов. Вам нужно будет использовать веб-интерфейс для создания и управления заметками, а затем ссылаться на них в разговорах чата AI.

Добавьте этот фрагмент в настройки VS Code:

{
  "openctx.providers": {
    "https://openctx.org/npm/@openctx/provider-modelcontextprotocol": {
      "nodeCommand": "node",
      "mcp.provider.uri": "file://path/to/notes-mcp-server.js",
      "mcp.provider.args": [
        "--dynamodb",
        "dynamodb://access_key:secret_key@region/table"
      ]
    }
  }
}

в качестве альтернативы используйте npx (работа не гарантируется):

{
  "openctx.providers": {
    "https://openctx.org/npm/@openctx/provider-modelcontextprotocol": {
      "nodeCommand": "node",
      "mcp.provider.uri": "file:///usr/local/bin/npx",
      "mcp.provider.args": [
        "-y",
        "-p",
        "mcp-notes",
        "mcp-notes-server",
        "--dynamodb",
        "dynamodb://access_key:secret_key@region/table"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Клайн

Добавьте этот фрагмент в cline_mcp_settings.json :

Рядом с кнопкой «Новая задача» вы найдете значок «Сервер MCP», а затем кнопку «Изменить настройки MCP» для открытия этого файла.

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "mcp-notes": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "-p",
        "mcp-notes",
        "mcp-notes-server",
        "--dynamodb",
        "dynamodb://access_key:secret_key@region/table"
      ]
    }
  }
}

🚀 Запуск веб-серверов

Веб-сервер предоставляет удобный интерфейс для управления заметками. Вы можете запускать веб-интерфейсы для управления заметками, добавлять новые заметки для ИИ или изменять части заметок, созданных ИИ.

npx -p mcp-notes mcp-notes-web-server --dynamodb "dynamodb://access_key:secret_key@region/table"
bun src/notes-web-server.ts --dynamodb "dynamodb://access_key:secret_key@region/table"

В качестве альтернативы, скомпилируйте с помощью npm run build и запустите node dist/notes-mcp-server.js или node dist/notes-web-server.js

Затем перейдите по адресу http://localhost:3100 в браузере, чтобы просмотреть заметки.

🔧 Доступные инструменты MCP

списокПримечания

  • Ввод: { tags?: string[] }

  • Вывод: Массив всех заметок, опционально отфильтрованный по тегам.

получитьПримечание

  • Ввод: { id: string }

  • Вывод: один объект заметки, соответствующий указанному идентификатору, или сообщение «не найдено», если совпадений не существует.

написатьПримечание

  • Ввод: { id: string, title: string, summary: string, tags: string[], content: string }

  • Вывод: сообщение об успешном завершении.

удалитьПримечание

  • Ввод: { id: string }

  • Вывод: сообщение с подтверждением удаления 🚮.

📝 Структура данных

Заметки хранятся с использованием следующей структуры:

  • id : Уникальный идентификатор заметки. Он должен быть описательным, со случайным числовым суффиксом, например "meeting-notes-1362".

  • title : Название заметки.

  • summary : Краткое изложение содержания заметки.

  • tags : Массив тегов, связанных с заметкой (например, ["meeting", "project-x"]).

  • content : Основное содержание заметки.

📸 Скриншоты

Клод Десктоп

✅ Полная функциональность

Скриншот вызова инструмента MCP Notes в Claude DesktopСкриншот ресурсов MCP Notes в Claude Desktop

Коди

✅ Упоминание заметок через ресурс

❎ Вызовы инструментов не поддерживаются

Скриншот MCP Notes в Cody

Клайн

✅ Полная функциональность с вызовами инструментов

❓ Ресурсы, похоже, не работают; требуется помощь.

Available Tools

4 tools
deleteNoteC

Deletes a specific note by its ID.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesID of the note to delete

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Deletes' which implies a destructive mutation, but lacks details on permissions needed, whether deletion is permanent or reversible, error handling (e.g., invalid ID), or side effects. This leaves significant gaps for a destructive operation.

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, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core action ('Deletes'), making it easy to scan and understand quickly.

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?

For a destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks critical information such as success/error responses, confirmation prompts, or behavioral nuances (e.g., cascading effects). The schema covers the parameter, but overall context for safe and effective use is insufficient.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, with the parameter 'id' documented as 'ID of the note to delete'. The description adds minimal value beyond this, only reiterating 'by its ID' without providing additional context like ID format or examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb ('Deletes') and resource ('a specific note'), making the purpose unambiguous. It specifies 'by its ID' which helps differentiate it from siblings like 'listNotes' or 'writeNote', though it doesn't explicitly contrast with them in the description text.

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 versus alternatives like 'writeNote' for updates or 'getNote' for retrieval. It mentions the 'ID' parameter but doesn't explain prerequisites (e.g., note must exist) or exclusions (e.g., cannot delete non-existent notes).

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

getNoteB

Retrieves a specific note by its ID.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesID of the note to retrieve

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves a note, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't cover aspects like error handling (e.g., what happens if the ID is invalid), authentication needs, rate limits, or return format. This leaves gaps in understanding how the tool behaves beyond the basic action.

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, clear sentence with zero waste—it directly states the tool's purpose without redundancy. It's appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool and front-loaded with the essential information.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (single parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic action but lacks details on behavior, usage context, or output, which could be helpful for an agent. It meets the minimum viable standard but has clear gaps in completeness.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, with the parameter 'id' fully documented in the schema as 'ID of the note to retrieve'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, such as format examples or constraints. Since the schema does the heavy lifting, the 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 ('Retrieves') and resource ('a specific note by its ID'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like listNotes (which likely lists multiple notes) or deleteNote (which deletes), but the specificity of 'by its ID' implies it's for fetching a single, known note.

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 versus alternatives. It doesn't mention siblings like listNotes for browsing notes or writeNote for creating/updating, nor does it specify prerequisites (e.g., needing a valid note ID). Usage is implied by the action but lacks explicit context.

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

listNotesB

Lists all notes, or search notes with tags you seen in previous list operation.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tagsNoOptional tags to filter notes. do not specify this if you didn't certainly sure what tags you want.

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool can list all notes or search with tags, but fails to describe critical behaviors: whether it's read-only (implied but not stated), how results are returned (e.g., pagination, format), error conditions, or any rate limits. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand operational traits.

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 concise with two clear clauses, front-loading the main purpose ('Lists all notes') and adding a secondary function ('or search notes with tags'). There's no wasted text, though the phrasing 'tags you seen in previous list operation' is slightly awkward but still functional.

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's moderate complexity (list/search functionality), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain return values, error handling, or behavioral constraints, leaving the agent with incomplete operational context. This is a significant gap for a tool without structured support.

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 has 100% description coverage, with the 'tags' parameter well-documented in the schema itself. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning tags are for filtering and should be used only if certain, but doesn't provide additional context like tag format examples or interaction details. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 tool's purpose: 'Lists all notes, or search notes with tags'. It specifies the verb ('Lists'/'search') and resource ('notes'), making the function understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'getNote' (which presumably retrieves a single note) or mention scope limitations, preventing a perfect score.

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 provides some implied guidance: it suggests using tags for filtering based on previous operations ('tags you seen in previous list operation'), which hints at a workflow. However, it lacks explicit instructions on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'getNote' for single notes or 'writeNote' for creation, and doesn't specify prerequisites or exclusions, leaving usage context incomplete.

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

writeNoteC

Creates or updates a note with a unique ID suffixed by a random number.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contentYesContent of the note
idYesUnique identifier of the note, should be unique enough like "a-note-about-python-file-server-design-109".
summaryYesShort summary of the note
tagsYesTags of the note
titleYesTitle of the note, describe what was inside the content.

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but provides minimal behavioral insight. It mentions the ID includes a random number suffix, hinting at uniqueness, but lacks details on permissions, error handling, or whether updates overwrite or merge. For a mutation tool, this is inadequate disclosure.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's function without redundancy. It's front-loaded and wastes no words, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

For a mutation tool with 5 required parameters and no annotations or output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain return values, error conditions, or the implications of 'creates or updates' (e.g., idempotency), leaving significant gaps for agent usage.

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 description coverage is 100%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying ID uniqueness with a random suffix, which is partially covered in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles most semantics.

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 verb ('Creates or updates') and resource ('a note'), making the purpose evident. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'getNote' or 'listNotes', which would require mentioning that this is the primary write operation versus read-only siblings.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an ID), compare to siblings like 'deleteNote', or specify scenarios for creation versus updates, leaving the agent without contextual usage cues.

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. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. 4 tool updatesv1.0.0
    • First observeddeleteNote
    • First observedgetNote
    • First observedlistNotes
    • First observedwriteNote
Install Server
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: deleteNote removes notes, getNote retrieves single notes, listNotes lists or searches notes, and writeNote creates or updates notes. There is no overlap in functionality, making tool selection straightforward for an agent.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in camelCase (e.g., deleteNote, getNote, listNotes, writeNote). This uniformity enhances readability and predictability across the toolset.

Tool Count5/5

With 4 tools, this server is well-scoped for a notes management system. Each tool serves a distinct CRUD operation (create, read, update, delete), which is appropriate and efficient for the domain without being overly sparse or bloated.

Completeness5/5

The toolset provides complete CRUD coverage for notes: writeNote handles creation and updates, getNote and listNotes cover retrieval, and deleteNote handles deletion. There are no obvious gaps, enabling agents to perform full lifecycle operations on notes.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessSyncing

Resources

Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.

Looking for Admin?

If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

Appeared in Searches

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/9Ninety/MCPNotes'

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