Skip to main content
Glama
adrienthebo
by adrienthebo

list_tags_tool

List all unique tags in your Obsidian vault with usage statistics to maintain consistency, analyze tagging patterns, and organize hierarchical tag structures.

Instructions

List all unique tags used across the vault with usage statistics.

When to use:

  • Before adding tags to maintain consistency

  • Getting an overview of your tagging taxonomy

  • Finding underused or overused tags

  • Discovering tag variations (e.g., 'project' vs 'projects')

  • Understanding hierarchical tag structures in your vault

  • Finding all files that use a specific tag (with include_files=true)

Hierarchical tags:

  • Lists both parent and full hierarchical paths (e.g., both "project" and "project/web")

  • Shows how nested tags are organized in your vault

  • Helps identify opportunities for better tag organization

File paths (with include_files=true):

  • Returns a list of all file paths that contain each tag

  • Useful for bulk operations on files with specific tags

  • Paths are relative to vault root

When NOT to use:

  • Getting tags for a specific note (use get_note_info)

  • Searching notes by tag (use search_notes with tag: prefix)

Performance note:

  • For vaults with <1000 notes: Fast (1-3 seconds)

  • For vaults with 1000-5000 notes: Moderate (3-10 seconds)

  • For vaults with >5000 notes: May be slow (10+ seconds)

  • Uses batched concurrent requests to optimize performance

  • include_files=true adds minimal overhead

Returns: All unique tags with optional usage counts and file paths

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
include_countsNoShow how many times each tag is used across your vault
sort_byNoSort tags alphabetically by 'name' or by popularity with 'count'name
include_filesNoInclude the list of file paths that contain each tag
ctxNo
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does this well by explaining performance characteristics (speed based on vault size), implementation details ('Uses batched concurrent requests'), and the effect of include_files parameter. It doesn't cover error conditions or authentication needs, but provides substantial operational 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 well-structured with clear sections (When to use, Hierarchical tags, File paths, When NOT to use, Performance note, Returns). While comprehensive, some sections could be more concise (e.g., the 'When to use' bullet list has some redundancy). Overall, it's appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's moderate complexity (4 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description provides excellent completeness. It covers purpose, usage guidelines, parameter implications, performance characteristics, hierarchical tag behavior, file path details, and return value information. This fully compensates for the lack of structured metadata.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 75% (3 of 4 parameters well-described). The description adds significant value beyond the schema by explaining the implications of include_files=true (returns file paths, useful for bulk operations, paths relative to vault root) and providing context about hierarchical tags. However, it doesn't fully explain the ctx parameter, which has no schema description.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'List all unique tags used across the vault with usage statistics.' It specifies the verb ('List'), resource ('unique tags'), and scope ('across the vault'), and distinguishes itself from siblings like get_note_info and search_notes by explicitly stating when not to use it. This provides excellent differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description includes explicit 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections, naming specific alternatives (get_note_info, search_notes with tag: prefix). It also provides contextual guidance like 'Before adding tags to maintain consistency' and 'Finding all files that use a specific tag (with include_files=true)', giving comprehensive usage direction.

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/adrienthebo/obsidian-mcp'

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