Write an Obsidian note

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It explains the three modes (create, append, prepend) and the overwrite flag behavior. However, it omits details on error handling when a file exists with overwrite=false, or any permission or side-effect information.

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: two sentences, no fluff, and front-loaded with the core action. Every word contributes meaning.

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 moderate complexity (5 params, no output schema), the description covers the main use cases but lacks details on edge cases, error modes, and return behavior. It is adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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?

Schema description coverage is 40%, so the description should compensate but does not. It mentions modes and overwrite, but these are already in the schema. The tool has 5 parameters, and the description adds little semantic value beyond the schema's own descriptions.

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 tool's purpose: 'Create a note or append/prepend content.' It specifies the verb (create, append, prepend) and resource (note), distinguishing it from sibling tools like obsidian_read_note and obsidian_list. It is specific and unambiguous.

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 implicit context for when to use the tool (to create or modify notes) but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or comparisons with alternatives. It mentions the overwrite behavior but does not address prerequisites or failure modes.

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