Navigate Obsidian History

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description adds that the tool targets the vault via the Local REST API and is unaffected by vault.select. It also mentions the no-op behavior, providing transparency about side effects and state dependency.

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 sentences efficiently cover purpose, behavior, and constraints. No unnecessary words or repetition; information is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one enum parameter, no nested objects, output schema exists), the description fully addresses all relevant aspects: functionality, no-op behavior, plugin dependency, and relationship to vault.select.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for the single parameter. The description reinforces the meaning with concrete examples ('direction:'back' = back one step'), adding value beyond the 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 navigates Obsidian back/forward file history, analogous to the arrow buttons. It distinguishes itself from sibling workspace tools by its specific history-navigation function.

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?

The description explains the tool is a no-op when the stack is empty and requires the Local REST API plugin. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the usage context is clear from the description.

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