Engram Obsidian Memory Sync

Create Note

create_note

Create a new note with automatic folder placement. If suggested_folder is omitted, the note is placed automatically. Never overwrites: fails if a note already exists at the resulting path.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`title`	Yes	Title for the new note
`content`	Yes	Markdown content
`vault_id`	No	Target vault: its name (e.g. "Engram") or its UUID. REQUIRED when you own more than one vault; the server keeps no active-vault state between calls, so it must be passed on every vault-scoped call. Omit only if you have a single vault. Call list_vaults if a name does not resolve.
`suggested_folder`	No	Only set when user explicitly named a folder

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`path`	Yes	Where the note landed; the server picks the folder

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 27, 2026
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 26, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / vault_id / description

Previous value: -"Target vault — its name (e.g. \"Engram\") or its UUID. REQUIRED when you own more than one vault — the server keeps no active-vault state between calls, so it must be passed on every vault-scoped call. Omit only if you have a single vault. Call list_vaults if a name does not resolve."New value: +"Target vault: its name (e.g. \"Engram\") or its UUID. REQUIRED when you own more than one vault; the server keeps no active-vault state between calls, so it must be passed on every vault-scoped call. Omit only if you have a single vault. Call list_vaults if a name does not resolve."

changedOutput schema / properties / path / description

Previous value: -"Where the note landed — the server picks the folder"New value: +"Where the note landed; the server picks the folder"

First observedSep 25, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Adds real behavior beyond the annotations: the note is auto-placed when no folder is given, and creation is non-overwriting (fails if a path already exists). This refines the annotation profile (idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false) with concrete failure semantics. It does not mention required permissions or vault-state caveats.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action, followed by the placement rule and the failure mode. Every sentence carries distinct information and none is padding.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, and the description covers the key non-obvious behaviors (auto-placement, non-overwrite failure). Minor gap: no explicit routing versus write_note/edit_note for an agent choosing among 17 siblings.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description contributes conditional meaning the schema lacks: what happens when suggested_folder is omitted. It reinforces rather than duplicates the vault_id guidance already in the 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a new note') plus a distinguishing scope detail ('automatic folder placement'), which separates it from plain write_note. It stops short of explicitly naming sibling alternatives, so an agent must infer the boundary from the sibling list.

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?

Gives one clear conditional: omit suggested_folder to let the server choose a location. However it never states when to prefer create_note over write_note, edit_note, or append_to_note, leaving the main routing decision implicit.

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

All Engram Obsidian Memory Sync tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Context All Your Agents Can ShareAgents share what they learn, hand off work, and hold it when you switch models. Start with 5 GB free.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.