obsidian_canvas_relayout

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, consistent with the mutation implied by 're-layout'. However, the description does not disclose whether existing node properties are preserved, or that dryRun defaults to true (schema shows default). This leaves ambiguity about default behavior.

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 two sentences long, front-loading the purpose and then clarifying the dry-run behavior. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 and the complexity of layout manipulation, the description lacks detail on what exactly 're-layout' entails (e.g., does it fully reposition nodes? preserve edges? return new canvas or void?). This leaves significant gaps for correct invocation.

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?

With schema description coverage at 50%, only vault and path have documentation; direction and dryRun lack schema descriptions. The description adds no extra parameter info beyond implicitly mentioning dry-run, failing to compensate for the gap.

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 re-layouts a JSON Canvas using dagre, distinguishing it from other canvas tools like obsidian_canvas_patch or obsidian_canvas_create. The verb 're-layout' and resource 'JSON Canvas' are specific, and the dry-run feature adds clarity.

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 automatic layout with dagre but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like manual patching or creation. It lacks exclusion criteria or when-not scenarios, leaving the agent without clear guidance on tool selection.

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