obsidian_list_tasks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Lists' implies a read-only operation, but nothing states pagination, result limits, permissions, or output shape for what could be a large vault-wide scan.

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 tight sentence with the scope qualifier front-loaded and zero filler. Brevity comes at some cost to completeness but nothing is wasted.

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 2-param read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the conceptual meaning of both parameters but leaves behavioral gaps (defaults, result size, ordering) that neither annotations nor schema fill in.

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. It does map meaningfully onto both params: 'pending or completed' corresponds to the status enum and 'vault-wide or in a note' corresponds to path. However it doesn't state that status defaults to 'all' or that omitting path scans the whole vault.

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 (Lists) and resource (tasks) plus the two scoping modes (vault-wide or in a note), which separates it from the mutation sibling obsidian_toggle_task. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool, so it stops short of 5.

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 phrase 'vault-wide or in a note' hints at the two operating modes but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and never mentions obsidian_toggle_task or obsidian_search as alternatives. The agent must infer usage entirely.

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