Skip to main content
Glama
YuNaga224

Obsidian Memory MCP

by YuNaga224

create_relations

Define connections between knowledge graph entities using active voice relations to build structured networks in Obsidian.

Instructions

Create multiple new relations between entities in the knowledge graph. Relations should be in active voice

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
relationsYes

Implementation Reference

  • Core implementation of the createRelations tool: loads graph, checks for duplicates, updates source entity markdown files with new relations using addRelationToContent, and returns created relations.
    async createRelations(relations: Relation[]): Promise<Relation[]> {
      const graph = await this.loadGraph();
      const newRelations: Relation[] = [];
      
      for (const relation of relations) {
        // Check if relation already exists
        const exists = graph.relations.some(r => 
          r.from === relation.from && 
          r.to === relation.to && 
          r.relationType === relation.relationType
        );
        
        if (exists) continue;
        
        // Update the source entity file
        const fromPath = getEntityPath(relation.from);
        try {
          const content = await fs.readFile(fromPath, 'utf-8');
          const updatedContent = addRelationToContent(content, relation);
          await fs.writeFile(fromPath, updatedContent, 'utf-8');
          
          newRelations.push(relation);
        } catch (error) {
          if (error instanceof Error && 'code' in error && (error as any).code === 'ENOENT') {
            throw new Error(`Entity ${relation.from} not found`);
          }
          throw error;
        }
      }
      
      return newRelations;
    }
  • index.ts:55-76 (registration)
    Tool registration in ListToolsRequestSchema handler: defines name, description, and input schema for create_relations tool.
    {
      name: "create_relations",
      description: "Create multiple new relations between entities in the knowledge graph. Relations should be in active voice",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          relations: {
            type: "array",
            items: {
              type: "object",
              properties: {
                from: { type: "string", description: "The name of the entity where the relation starts" },
                to: { type: "string", description: "The name of the entity where the relation ends" },
                relationType: { type: "string", description: "The type of the relation" },
              },
              required: ["from", "to", "relationType"],
            },
          },
        },
        required: ["relations"],
      },
    },
  • MCP CallToolRequestSchema dispatch case: handles tool invocation by calling storageManager.createRelations and formatting response.
    case "create_relations":
      return { content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(await storageManager.createRelations(args.relations as Relation[]), null, 2) }] };
  • Input schema definition for validating arguments to the create_relations tool.
    inputSchema: {
      type: "object",
      properties: {
        relations: {
          type: "array",
          items: {
            type: "object",
            properties: {
              from: { type: "string", description: "The name of the entity where the relation starts" },
              to: { type: "string", description: "The name of the entity where the relation ends" },
              relationType: { type: "string", description: "The type of the relation" },
            },
            required: ["from", "to", "relationType"],
          },
        },
      },
      required: ["relations"],
    },
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states this is a creation operation, implying mutation, but does not cover critical aspects like permissions needed, whether it's idempotent, error handling, or what happens on success/failure. The 'active voice' note is trivial and does not add meaningful behavioral context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise with two sentences, and the first sentence front-loads the core purpose effectively. The second sentence ('Relations should be in active voice') is arguably unnecessary but does not significantly detract from clarity. Overall, it is well-structured and avoids verbosity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity of a mutation tool with no annotations, 0% schema description coverage, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral traits, parameter meanings, return values, and error conditions. For a tool that creates multiple relations, this level of documentation is inadequate for safe and effective use.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, meaning the input schema provides no parameter descriptions. The tool description mentions 'relations' but does not explain the structure or semantics of the 'relations' array (e.g., what 'from', 'to', 'relationType' mean beyond the schema's basic types). It adds minimal value over the bare schema, insufficient to compensate for the low coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Create multiple new relations') and the resource ('between entities in the knowledge graph'), which is specific and informative. However, it does not explicitly differentiate this tool from its sibling 'create_entities' or 'delete_relations', which would be needed for a score of 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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 like 'create_entities' or 'delete_relations'. It mentions 'relations should be in active voice', which is a stylistic note but not a usage guideline. Without explicit when/when-not instructions or named alternatives, this falls to a minimal score.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/YuNaga224/obsidian-memory-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server