Obsidian MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'List saved workspaces' implies a read-only operation but doesn't specify what format the listing returns, whether it's paginated, if it requires specific permissions, or how it handles the optional parameters. The description lacks behavioral context beyond the basic operation.

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 maximally concise at just three words, front-loading the core purpose without any unnecessary elaboration. Every word earns its place in communicating the essential function.

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 tool with 2 parameters (0% documented in schema), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how to use the parameters, or provide any behavioral context needed for proper 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?

With 0% schema description coverage for both parameters, the description provides no information about what 'vault' or 'total' parameters do. The description doesn't mention parameters at all, leaving their purpose and usage completely undocumented despite the schema showing they exist.

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 'List saved workspaces' clearly states the action (list) and resource (saved workspaces), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'obsidian_workspace_load' or 'obsidian_workspace_save' which also deal with workspaces but perform different operations.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple workspace-related tools in the sibling list (workspace_load, workspace_save), there's no indication of when listing workspaces is appropriate versus loading or saving them.

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