obsidian_list_lists

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It mentions the default vault scope and frames the operation as a read-only lookup ('List existing... avoid creating duplicates'), implying no side effects. It does not specify return format, but the output schema exists and the tool is simple.

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?

Three concise sentences, with the primary purpose front-loaded in the first sentence. Each subsequent sentence adds clear usage guidance without repetition or fluff.

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 zero-parameter, output-schema-provided tool, the description completely covers its purpose, when to use it, and why it matters. The mention of duplicate avoidance (e.g., mercado, compras) gives practical context for real-world usage.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the description need not explain parameter semantics. The baseline of 4 applies because there is no parameter complexity to clarify and schema coverage is 100% by virtue of having an empty 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 the tool's verb and resource: 'List existing Obsidian lists in the configured default vault.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like obsidian_list_tasks and obsidian_list_notes by focusing specifically on lists rather than notes or tasks.

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?

Explicitly instructs when to use the tool: 'before adding/removing/updating list items when the user gives an approximate list name.' It also provides a clear rationale—'Prefer an existing compatible list to avoid creating duplicates'—which helps the agent decide between this and mutation tools.

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