List Or Search Obsidian Commands

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. Description adds value by specifying it returns both built-in and plugin commands, case-insensitive substring matching, and the plugin requirement. No contradictions.

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?

Description is two effective sentences plus a clarifying note about routing. Every sentence adds value, no redundancy. Front-loaded with main purpose.

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?

Complete coverage for a list/search tool: behavior with/without query, intended use (discovering IDs), prerequisites (plugin), routing behavior. Output schema exists, so return format is separately documented.

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 single parameter `query` has a description in schema (100% coverage). The description adds context: substring matching is case-insensitive, omitting query returns all commands. This meaningfully enriches the schema information.

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 lists or searches Obsidian commands. It distinguishes between listing all commands (no query) and filtering by substring match (with query). References sibling tool `commands.execute`, differentiating its role.

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 to use this tool to discover command IDs before calling `commands.execute`. Notes read-only nature, substring matching behavior, requirement of the Local REST API plugin, and clarifies it's not affected by `vault.select`.

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