diff

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'list or diff' without explaining what either mode produces, whether the tool is read-only, or any side effects. The behavior is largely opaque.

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 sentence is concise, but it omits essential details for a tool with six parameters and no other context. It is under-specified rather than efficiently informative.

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 (6 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description is severely incomplete. It fails to describe what the tool returns, how parameters interact, or any usage constraints.

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?

The description does not explain any of the six parameters. Schema coverage is only 17% (only vault has a description). Key parameters like file, path, from_version, to_version, and filter are left undefined, leaving the agent guessing.

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 the tool lists or diffs local/sync versions, which conveys a specific verb and resource. It hints at comparing file versions, distinguishing it from sibling tools like file or read. However, it lacks clarity on what 'versions' refer to (e.g., file history) and doesn't explicitly state it operates on Obsidian notes.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives like file, history, or read. The description does not mention typical scenarios, prerequisites, or contrast with siblings.

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