List Obsidian items

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only says 'list', implying a read-only operation, but does not disclose any behavioral details such as authentication requirements, side effects, or error conditions. The description is too brief to be transparent.

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 of 8 words, making it concise. However, it lacks any structural elements like examples or usage context. It is minimally adequate but not 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 no output schema, no annotations, and 4 parameters with 0% schema coverage, the description fails to provide complete context. It does not describe return values, parameter dependencies, or error conditions, leaving gaps for the 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?

The input schema has 0% parameter description coverage, and the tool description does not explain any parameters (type, vault, folder, extension). The description adds no meaning beyond the schema's property names and enum values.

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 it lists vaults, files, or folders, using the verb 'list' and specifying three resource types. It distinguishes from sibling tools (obsidian_read_note, obsidian_write_note, etc.) which perform different actions. However, it could be more precise about what 'known to Obsidian' means.

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 (e.g., obsidian_search for searching notes). It does not mention prerequisites or context, leaving the agent to guess.

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