_obsidian_vault

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it checks environment variable and config file, returns a Path or None. No side effects or advanced behaviors are needed for this simple lookup tool, so transparency is adequate.

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 clear and well-structured, but slightly verbose. It could be more concise while retaining key information. Every sentence adds value, but some redundancy exists (e.g., 'Takes no arguments' is already obvious from schema).

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 no parameters and an output schema, the description is complete. It explains the source of the vault path, the context of use, and the return value. No additional information is needed.

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?

There are no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds meaning by explaining what the tool does without parameters, meeting the baseline of 4 as per guidelines.

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 clearly states the tool resolves the configured Obsidian vault path. It specifies the verb 'resolve' and resource 'vault path', and distinguishes from sibling tools by mentioning it's used by note-indexing tools like kg_index_notes.

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?

The description explains that the tool takes no arguments and is meant for note-indexing tools. It clarifies when to use it, but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance. Still, 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.