Skip to main content
Glama
bezata

kObsidian MCP

Edit Frontmatter

notes.frontmatter
Idempotent

Set or unset YAML frontmatter fields in a note. Choose merge to update specific fields or replace to overwrite the entire block.

Instructions

Set or unset fields in a note's YAML frontmatter. set is a map of {field: value} pairs to write; unset is a list of field names to delete. strategy:'merge' (default) leaves unspecified fields untouched; strategy:'replace' overwrites the entire frontmatter block with set (any field not in set is dropped). At least one of set or unset is required. Idempotent — re-running with the same arguments converges on the same frontmatter state.

Operates on the session-active vault (see vault.current — selectable via vault.select) unless an explicit vaultPath argument is passed, which always wins.

Examples:

Example 1 — Set two fields, merging with existing frontmatter:

{
  "path": "Projects/Alpha.md",
  "set": {
    "status": "in-progress",
    "owner": "behzat"
  }
}

Example 2 — Remove a field:

{
  "path": "Projects/Alpha.md",
  "unset": [
    "draft"
  ]
}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes
setNoMap of frontmatter fields to set. Values overwrite any existing entry.
unsetNoField names to delete from the frontmatter.
strategyNo`merge` (default) = combine with existing frontmatter; `replace` = overwrite the whole frontmatter block with `set` (ignores existing unspecified fields).merge
vaultPathNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
changedYesTrue if the tool altered vault state on this call; false if it was a no-op.
targetYesThe path or identifier the tool acted on.
summaryYesShort human-readable summary of what happened.
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true, and the description explicitly confirms idempotence. It also details the behavior of strategy (merge vs replace), which goes beyond annotations. No contradictions detected.

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: purpose, parameter explanation, vault context, behavioral notes, and examples. It is front-loaded and informative. Slightly lengthy but every sentence adds value. Could be slightly more concise without losing clarity.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the presence of an output schema, the description need not detail return values. It covers purpose, parameters, behavior, and usage context. The examples are helpful. However, it could briefly mention that the tool returns the updated note or frontmatter to round out completeness.

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

Parameters5/5

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

The description adds significant meaning beyond the input schema: it explains the interaction between set/unset, clarifies the required condition (at least one), and details the merge vs replace strategies. The examples demonstrate usage, compensating for the 60% schema coverage.

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 'Set or unset fields in a note's YAML frontmatter' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like notes.edit by focusing on frontmatter manipulation. The examples further reinforce the purpose.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides clear guidance: at least one of set/unset is required, strategy options are explained, and vault selection context is given. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like notes.edit or mention when to prefer this over editing the full note. Still, the guidance is sufficient for correct usage.

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/bezata/kObsidian'

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