Skip to main content
Glama
emguide

Headless Obsidian MCP

by emguide

list_vault_issues

Identify and list vault hygiene issues like orphan notes, unresolved links, broken anchors, and conflicted copies to maintain a clean Obsidian vault.

Instructions

List the vault-hygiene issues get_vault_stats only counts. kind:'orphans' returns note headers for notes with no inbound or outbound resolved links; kind:'unresolved_links' returns, grouped by source note, the wikilink targets that resolve to nothing (the notes with broken links); kind:'broken_anchors' returns, grouped by source note, the [[note#heading]] anchors that resolve to a note but not to any heading in it; kind:'conflicts' returns the unreconciled conflict copies (notes named "… (conflicted YYYY-MM-DD HHMMSS)") each paired with the original note they diverged from. Index-backed. For the grouped kinds, limit/offset count groups (source notes), not individual targets.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindYesWhich issue list to return.
limitNoMaximum number of rows/groups to return (default 100; 0 = unbounded). For unresolved_links, this counts groups (source notes), not individual targets.
offsetNoRows/groups to skip, for pagination (default 0).
include_contextNoFor kinds unresolved_links/broken_anchors: decorate each target with the source line(s) containing it, as { line, text } (call-time reads over the returned window only). Errors on kinds orphans and conflicts (neither has links to contextualize).
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It does so by noting that the tool is index-backed, describing limit/offset semantics per kind, and specifying that include_context errors on certain kinds. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or mention authorization needs, leaving minor gaps.

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?

The description is concise yet thorough, with every sentence contributing essential information. It is well-organized: first a general statement, then enumeration of kinds, then pagination details. No redundant or filler content.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the absence of an output schema, the description covers what each kind returns and how parameters interact. It addresses all four parameters and their nuances, leaving no obvious gaps for an agent to misinterpret the tool's behavior.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds substantial value: it explains each enum value of 'kind' in detail, clarifies that limit/offset count groups for grouped kinds, and details the behavior and error conditions of 'include_context'. This goes well beyond the schema's minimal descriptions.

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 uses the verb 'list' and specifies the resource as 'vault-hygiene issues', clearly distinguishing four kinds. It contrasts with sibling 'get_vault_stats' by stating that the latter only counts, while this tool returns the actual issues. The purpose is specific and unambiguous.

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 explains when to use each kind and how pagination works differently for grouped kinds. It implicitly distinguishes from 'get_vault_stats' but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list alternatives beyond that one sibling. The guidance is clear but not exhaustive.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/emguide/headless-obsidian-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server