Another bloated Obsidian MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

create_from_template

Create a new Obsidian note from a template, substituting custom variables and title placeholders. Reuse templates to populate notes with dynamic content.

Instructions

Create a new note from a template with variable substitution

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "template": "<template>",
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "create_from_template"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`path`	Yes	Path for the new note
`title`	No	Title for the note (also replaces {{title}} in template)
`template`	Yes	Name of the template to use
`variables`	No	Custom variables as key-value pairs

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.3.0Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It mentions variable substitution, which is a key behavior, but doesn't disclose what happens if the template is missing, whether existing notes are overwritten, or how errors are handled. This is a basic level of transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single sentence, front-loaded with the verb, directly states the purpose. No unnecessary words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has four parameters including a nested object, but no output schema. The description doesn't mention return values or behavior on failure. However, the purpose is clear and parameters are documented, so it's adequate but not complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has descriptions for all parameters (100% coverage), so the description doesn't need to add per-parameter detail. The mention of variable substitution provides context that ties the parameters together, but adds little beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's function: creating a new note from a template with variable substitution. The verb 'create' plus resource 'new note' and method 'from a template with variable substitution' distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_note (which likely doesn't use templates) and apply_template (which may apply to existing notes).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage when a new note is needed from a template with variable substitution, distinguishing from create_note. However, it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it provides clear context without explicit guidance.

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