Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
obsidian-mcp

obsidian-mcp

by fodaveg
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Append to a note

obsidian_append

Append new content to any existing note in your Obsidian vault, adding text to the end of the file for efficient note updating.

Instructions

Appends content to the end of an existing note.

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": {
      "file": "<file>",
      "content": "<content>"
    },
    "name": "obsidian_append"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fileYesNote name / wikilink.
contentYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Only states 'appends' and 'existing note,' implying mutation but lacks details like idempotency, permissions, or effects on non-existent notes.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Single sentence is concise but overly minimal. Could be improved with brief additional context without becoming verbose.

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

Completeness2/5

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

No output schema and no annotations. For a simple tool, description omits error conditions, note existence behavior, and return value. Incomplete guidance for selection and invocation.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is 50% (content parameter has no description). Description adds no extra meaning beyond schema, such as clarifying file path format or content encoding requirements.

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?

Description clearly states the tool appends content to the end of an existing note, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like obsidian_prepend and obsidian_read.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as obsidian_prepend for prepending or obsidian_read for just reading. Does not specify prerequisites like note existence.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools