obsidian_recent_changes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and under-delivers: it implies a read-only listing but never states sort order, default recency window, whether the result is capped, or that it is safe/non-mutating. Only the vague purpose sentence is offered.

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 efficient sentence with the core purpose front-loaded and no filler. It is concise, though conciseness is partly achieved by omitting necessary detail.

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 three-parameter tool with 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is far too thin. An agent cannot know how to filter, cap, or interpret results from this text alone.

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 mentions none of the three parameters (limit, folder, sinceDays). The agent gets no explanation of what folder scoping does, what the default/limit behavior is, or how sinceDays interacts with the 'recently' claim.

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?

Clear verb ('Lists') plus resource ('notes') and scope ('recently modified or created within the vault'), which hints at a recency-filtered listing. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like obsidian_search or obsidian_list_files, so an agent must infer the distinction.

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 'for change awareness' gestures at when it is useful, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no named alternative (e.g., obsidian_search or obsidian_find_notes) for broader lookups.

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