Search Obsidian notes

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds substantial behavioral detail: the tool is 'local and read-only,' uses a deterministic ranking algorithm, and returns paths, headings, excerpts, tags, scores, and pagination metadata. It also explains paging behavior via 'has_more' and 'next_offset', which annotations do not cover.

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?

The description is compact and front-loaded: it opens with the core capability, then gives when-to-use guidance, then result contents, then refinement/pagination advice. Every sentence contributes actionable information with no filler.

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 the tool's moderate complexity, the 83% schema coverage, and the existence of an output schema, the description covers the essential operational context: selection, scoping, return fields, pagination, and safety. The agent has enough to invoke it correctly without guessing.

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 83%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds operational meaning beyond the schema: it tells the agent to use 'prefix' or 'tag' to narrow broad results and explains the pagination contract between 'has_more' and 'next_offset'. This is useful coupling information the schema alone does not provide.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Search Markdown notes' using deterministic phrase, token, and Chinese 2-gram ranking. It differentiates from siblings by explicitly framing itself as the tool to 'Use this first for topical discovery or paraphrased questions.'

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 clearly tells the agent when to use the tool ('Use this first for topical discovery or paraphrased questions') and how to refine broad results ('add prefix or tag'). It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or state when to avoid this tool, but the guidance is strong enough for an agent to select it correctly.

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