obsidian_move_note

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. The phrase 'with revision check' hints at optimistic concurrency, which is valuable, but it does not explain what happens on a revision mismatch, whether an existing target is overwritten, or what permissions are required for a mutation.

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 front-loaded clause with zero filler. It is efficient, though arguably terse given the amount of missing behavioral context.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description leaves critical gaps: conflict handling, target-overwrite semantics, and permission requirements are all absent.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. 'Moves or renames' maps to sourcePath/targetPath and 'revision check' maps to expectedRevision, giving each of the 3 params a rough role, but no format or validation details are provided and the required/optional distinction is unstated.

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 pair (moves/renames) and resource (a note) scoped to the vault, and adds a behavioral detail (revision check). It is clearly distinguishable from create/update/delete siblings, though it does not explicitly name which sibling to prefer.

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 over obsidian_update_note (which could also alter a note) or when a move/rename is appropriate. No prerequisites or conditions are stated.

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