obsidian_search_notes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it is truncated and stops before describing tag matching semantics, result limits, pagination, vault scoping, or return format. The one real disclosure is that text matching is case-insensitive and covers title plus body text.

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?

The text is cut off mid-sentence, so the definition is structurally incomplete rather than merely terse. What exists is front-loaded reasonably, but an unfinished sentence cannot be considered appropriately sized.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, an empty parameter schema, and a truncated description, an agent lacks enough to invoke this correctly — it cannot tell what arguments the tool accepts or how results are returned.

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 schema declares zero parameters, which normally sets a baseline of 4, but the description references a `query` parameter (title and body text, case-insensitive) and a tag parameter that do not appear in the schema at all. That mismatch makes the parameter picture ambiguous rather than adding clean meaning.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Searches the notes of an Obsidian vault') and names two search modes (text, tag), which distinguishes it from write-oriented siblings like obsidian_write_note. However, the description is truncated mid-sentence ('by tag (`...'), so the full scope of the search modes is never delivered.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this search versus siblings such as obsidian_read_note, obsidian_list_vaults, or the generic search_notes. The mode list (text/tag) hints at usage but no conditions, exclusions, or alternatives are stated.

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