import_markdown_vault

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. Discloses non-destructive behavior and return format (created, updated, deleted-edge, conflict counts). Lacks details on authorization or rate limits, but adequate for a simple import tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, zero waste. First sentence states purpose and key trait, second gives usage and return info. Highly concise and front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given single parameter and no output schema, description explains what the tool does and what it returns. Mentions conflict counts, which is important. Could mention error scenarios but not necessary for typical use.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and already describes 'root_path' as 'Source directory of the Markdown vault to import.' Description does not add extra meaning beyond schema, baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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

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

Clearly states verb (import), resource (Obsidian Markdown vault), and context (into current graph). Distinguishes from siblings like export_markdown_vault and import_graph_backup by specifying 'non-destructive' and 'sync edited vault notes back into memory'.

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

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

Provides clear use case: 'sync edited vault notes back into memory'. Implicitly indicates when to use (after editing vault externally). Does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, but context is clear.

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