Read an Obsidian note

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

Annotations already mark the operation read-only and closed-world; the description adds a concrete security behavior (path traversal outside the vault is rejected) and enumerates the return fields (content, tags, truncation state, source path). This goes beyond the structured annotations and helps the agent predict side effects and output.

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?

Four short sentences, each with a distinct job: what it reads, where paths resolve, how to keep results concise, and what is returned. There is no filler or repetition.

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 read tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential invocation details: required path, optional heading and max_chars, return contents, and vault confinement. It doesn't describe error cases or the exact shape of truncation state, but those are not necessary for correct invocation.

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 input schema already documents all three parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minor usage nuance around exact headings and truncation, but no new parameter semantics beyond what the schema describes.

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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('one note or one heading') and frames the prerequisite ('after discovering its path'), which clearly separates it from sibling discovery tools. It also names the main return payload components, leaving no ambiguity about the tool's function.

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?

It explicitly instructs that the tool is for reading a note after its path has been discovered, implying search/list are the preceding steps. The tip to use an exact heading for long notes provides condition-specific guidance. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use, but the context is clear.

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