obsidian_create_note

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 discloses nothing about what happens when the target path already exists, what the overwrite flag does, whether templating merges or replaces content, or what permissions are needed. It only conveys the baseline fact that this is a write operation, leaving the destructive-adjacent overwrite behavior entirely unexplained.

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?

A single short, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, but its brevity reflects under-specification rather than efficient communication given the tool's four parameters and mutation semantics.

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?

For a four-parameter write tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is far too thin. It omits collision/overwrite behavior, template resolution semantics, and any routing guidance among the many sibling note tools.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it only alludes to one of four parameters ('template'). Path, content, and especially the overwrite flag and its default-false semantics are undocumented anywhere.

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 and resource ('Creates a new note') and adds the template capability, so the agent knows this is a creation operation distinct from update/append by the word 'new'. However, it does not explicitly name or contrast with the many sibling note-mutation tools (obsidian_update_note, obsidian_append_note, obsidian_prepend_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?

No indication of when to use this versus obsidian_update_note, obsidian_append_note, or obsidian_find_notes, and no prerequisites or failure conditions. The only hint is the implicit 'new' in the purpose, which the agent must infer.

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