Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Obsidian Everywhere

Obsidian Everywhere

by junnnnnw00
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Get Obsidian Hotkeys

get_hotkeys
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve Obsidian vault hotkey bindings and their command IDs from .obsidian/hotkeys.json to identify configured shortcuts.

Instructions

Read persisted Obsidian hotkey bindings and their actual command IDs from .obsidian/hotkeys.json. This includes configured commands, not the app's full runtime command registry.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_hotkeys"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.6.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, idempotent behavior. Description adds specific file source and clarifies inclusion of only configured commands, providing useful context beyond annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two concise sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the main action, then clarifies scope.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no parameters, no output schema, and comprehensive annotations, the description provides all necessary information: purpose, source, and scope.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

No parameters exist; schema coverage is 100%. Baseline of 4 applies. Description does not need to elaborate on parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states it reads persisted hotkey bindings and their command IDs from a specific file. It distinguishes from siblings like set_hotkey by focusing on read-only retrieval of configured commands.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Implied usage: to view user's custom hotkeys, not full registry. No explicit when-not or alternatives mentioned, but the file path and scope provide clear context.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools