obsidian_create_note

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses key behaviors: always creates a new note, suffixes _2/_3 on slug conflicts, and provides content formatting guidance (well-formatted Markdown, don't repeat title). This is substantial but does not cover auth or return details beyond the output schema.

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 concise, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and every sentence provides useful information. No filler or repetition of schema fields.

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 simple two-parameter create tool with an output schema present, the description covers purpose, usage, slug conflict behavior, and content expectations. It could explicitly mention return behavior but the output schema covers that, making it largely complete.

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?

Schema has 0% description coverage, so the description compensates by explaining that content should be well-formatted Markdown and not repeat the title. It implies title is the note title and content is the body, adding meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 it creates a new standalone Markdown note in the default vault, with a specific verb and resource. It also differentiates from siblings by mentioning mode=create and slug conflict handling, which distinguishes it from append/create_or_append tools.

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?

It explicitly says 'Use when the user asks to create a new note' and describes behavior for existing slugs, implying it is for new notes rather than appending. It does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools, but the context makes the distinction clear.

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