run_obsidian

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: the configured vault is injected automatically, vault guard applies, and disruptive commands are rejected. It explains how to pass flags and parse JSON output. However, it does not describe error handling or what happens on invalid commands.

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 structured into clear paragraphs: purpose, parameter usage, and restrictions. It is front-loaded with the main purpose. While it could be slightly more concise, it remains efficient without fluff.

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 the tool's complexity as a CLI wrapper, the description covers usage, parameter details, and restrictions. It does not list all possible commands, which is acceptable. There is no output schema, but the json parsing flag is mentioned. Adequate for the context.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description adds essential semantics: it explains that `command` is the CLI name, `params` is a mapping with examples (booleans as true, values as strings), and `json` parses output. This compensates fully for the bare schema.

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 clearly states that the tool runs any Obsidian CLI command not covered by a dedicated tool, and targets power users. This distinguishes it from siblings like create_note or search_vault by covering the gap of unsupported commands.

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?

It explicitly says when to use (any CLI command not covered by dedicated tools) and when not to use (disruptive commands like restart, reload, etc. are rejected). It provides examples for boolean flags and value options, giving clear usage guidance.

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