obsidian_get_property

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. 'Retrieves' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not cover behavior when the property is missing, the return format or typing of the value, required permissions, or whether the path is vault-relative. These are meaningful gaps for a retrieval tool.

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 description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately terse for a simple getter, though the extreme brevity contributes to gaps documented in other dimensions.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage for two required parameters, the description is not complete enough for reliable invocation. It omits path semantics, missing-property behavior, and return value details, which an agent would need for correct use.

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% and the description adds almost no parameter meaning. It does not explain that 'path' identifies a note or file and 'name' identifies the frontmatter key, nor does it clarify expected formats or edge cases. The agent must infer both required parameters' semantics.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieves a specific frontmatter property value.' It implicitly distinguishes itself from the plural obsidian_get_properties by saying 'a specific' property, but it does not explicitly name or compare against any sibling tool.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as obsidian_get_properties or obsidian_set_property. The description only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage contexts.

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