obsidian_mobile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It states the toggle action but lacks details on side effects, scope, or what exactly 'mobile emulation' changes. This is insufficient for a tool with no behavioral metadata.

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 a single sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately concise for a simple toggle tool, though missing some context. It could be slightly improved but is well-structured.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description is too minimal. It doesn't explain what mobile emulation entails, return behavior, or constraints. For a simple tool, a bit more context (e.g., 'toggles responsive design mode for testing mobile layouts') would improve completeness.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage with clear parameter descriptions ('Enable mobile emulation', 'Disable mobile emulation'). The tool description adds little beyond summarizing that it toggles, so baseline 3 is appropriate. It doesn't introduce new semantics.

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 'Toggle mobile emulation on or off' clearly states the action (toggle) and resource (mobile emulation). However, it doesn't specify the context (e.g., browser, Obsidian itself) or differentiate from sibling tools, but the resource is distinct enough among the sibling list.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or contexts where mobile emulation is applicable. It only states the function.

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