Search Obsidian Notes

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full disclosure burden and leaves key behavior unstated: whether matching is substring, whole-word, or regex; case sensitivity; whether frontmatter/tags are searched; and whether result counts are capped. For a search tool these semantics materially change results, and none are disclosed.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient rather than padded; the shortfall is missing information, not wasted wording.

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?

For a one-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should at least say what comes back (note paths, titles, snippets) and how matching works. Neither is present, leaving the agent unable to predict results or refine queries.

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?

The single parameter has 100% schema description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The phrase "containing specific text" weakly implies substring content matching, but adds no syntax, escaping, or multi-term behavior beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Search for notes") plus the matching condition ("containing specific text"), which distinguishes it from create/update/delete siblings. It does not, however, differentiate itself from list-files or get-note, which an agent could plausibly pick for a similar goal.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives such as obsidian-list-files or obsidian-get-note. The agent must infer from the tool name alone that this is the route for content-based lookup rather than direct retrieval.

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