Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Obsidian MCP Server

Obsidian MCP Server

by cupkappu
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

get_file

Retrieve content from any file in an Obsidian vault. Optionally return structured JSON with metadata for easier processing.

Instructions

Get the content of a specific file in the vault

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "filename": "<filename>"
    },
    "name": "get_file"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
asJsonNoReturn structured JSON with metadata instead of raw markdown
filenameYesPath to the file relative to vault root

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'get the content,' which implies a read operation, but it does not mention return format, error behavior, or side effects. The schema covers the asJson parameter, but the description adds no behavioral context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence with no wasted words, front-loaded with the verb and resource.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Despite full parameter schema coverage, the description lacks context about return values and how to differentiate from open_file. With no output schema and no annotations, this minimal description leaves gaps for an agent to understand the exact output and when to choose this tool.

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

Parameters3/5

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

The input schema provides full descriptions for both parameters (filename path and asJson behavior), giving 100% schema coverage. The description adds no additional semantic value beyond what the schema already provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves file content from the vault using the verb 'get' and specifies the resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools that perform different operations like create, delete, or list, though it does not explicitly contrast with open_file.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like open_file or get_periodic_note. The description simply states what it does without any context for selection.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools