Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Obsidian MCP Extended

Obsidian MCP Extended

by aleksakarac
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

delete_note_tool

Removes a specified note from your Obsidian vault by providing its file path.

Instructions

Delete a note from the vault.

Args: path: Path to the note to delete

Returns: Deletion status

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "delete_note_tool"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes
ctxNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.1.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The description simply states it deletes a note, but does not disclose whether deletion is permanent, if it can be undone, or what side effects occur (e.g., cascading deletions). With no annotations, the description carries full burden and fails to provide sufficient 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.

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is concise with a clear Args/Returns structure, but it is too brief, lacking sufficient detail. It achieves minimum viability but could be more informative without being verbose.

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 that this is a delete operation with no output schema or annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return value, error handling, or confirm the deletion action, leaving critical gaps for an agent.

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?

The description adds a brief explanation of the 'path' parameter (path to the note), but does not specify format or constraints. The 'ctx' parameter is not explained at all. Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description does not compensate adequately.

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 it deletes a note from the vault, which is a specific verb-resource pair. It distinguishes from siblings like create_note or update_note, but does not explicitly contrast with them.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., moving or archiving). No when-not or prerequisite information is provided.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools