노트 생성

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that Obsidian YAML properties are assigned in a fixed order and that empty keys are preserved when parameters are omitted. However, it does not address overwrite behavior or error conditions beyond what the schema already covers.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by relevant YAML behavior. No redundant information, making it efficient 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?

The description covers the essential creation behavior and YAML handling. Combined with the rich schema, it provides enough to invoke the tool correctly. However, it lacks explicit mention of return values and conflict/overwrite behavior, which would improve completeness.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds semantic value by linking parameters to YAML fields, specifying the fixed order of properties, and clarifying that empty values result in empty keys. This goes beyond the schema's property descriptions.

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 states 'Vault 안에 새 노트를 만든다' (Creates a new note in the Vault), using a specific verb and resource. It also explains the YAML property assignment behavior, clearly distinguishing it from siblings like create_directory and update_note.

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 does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives. The tool name and sibling list imply usage for creating notes, but no exclusion or alternative guidance is provided, relying on the agent to infer.

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