Search by Tag

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

With no annotations provided, the description should disclose whether the tool is read-only, the return format, and any limitations. It does not mention the effect of the 'limit' parameter, and the phrase 'all notes' conflicts with the limit's existence. The only behavioral detail given is the #-prefix formatting rule, which is not sufficient.

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 concise at two sentences, starting with the primary function and following with a necessary formatting instruction. Every word adds value, with no redundant or vague phrasing.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should at least hint at the response shape. It says 'Find all notes' but does not specify whether it returns note contents, paths, or metadata. It also lacks information about tag matching behavior (exact vs partial) or search scope (frontmatter/body), leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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?

Both parameters are described in the schema with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description's note about omitting the # prefix duplicates the schema's tag description and adds no new meaning. The 'limit' parameter is not mentioned but is already well-documented in the 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 the action ('Find all notes') and the resource ('containing a specific Obsidian tag'), with examples like #prd and #jira. It also clarifies the tag format (no # prefix), which makes the purpose unambiguous and distinguishes it from a general note search tool.

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 implies the tool is for tag-based searches, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_notes. There is no mention of exclusions or preferred scenarios, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and description.

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