obsidian_execute_command

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false. The description adds the opt-in requirement, but does not elaborate on the potential for modifications or side effects. No contradiction with annotations.

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 extremely concise: one sentence plus a short condition clause. Every word is necessary and no redundant information is present.

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 presence of annotations (destructiveHint, readOnlyHint) and a single parameter, the description covers the essential behavioral context. However, the lack of output schema and any mention of return value or error handling leaves a minor gap. Still adequate for a simple tool.

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 one parameter 'commandId' with 0% description coverage. The description mentions 'by id' but does not clarify what constitutes a valid commandId or where to find it (e.g., from obsidian_list_commands). The agent receives minimal guidance beyond the parameter name.

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 executes an Obsidian command-palette command by its id, distinguishing it from other tools like obsidian_list_commands. The verb 'Execute' and resource 'command-palette command' are specific.

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 a key usage condition: 'Opt-in with OBSIDIAN_ENABLE_COMMANDS=1.' It does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives, but the purpose is distinct enough to imply usage. Could be improved by noting cautious use given destructiveHint.

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