List Obsidian Notes

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds value by specifying that hidden folders (.obsidian, .git) are skipped, which is a behavioral detail not captured by annotations. However, it does not describe the output format or pagination.

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 concise sentences with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and includes key behavioral details efficiently.

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 low complexity and good annotations, the description provides a basic understanding. However, it does not specify what the output contains (e.g., note paths, titles) or any ordering/limit information. This leaves the agent with incomplete context for using the 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what is in the schema (just mentions 'optionally scoped to a folder', which is already in the param description).

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 action ('List'), the resource ('markdown notes'), and the context ('in the vault, optionally scoped to a folder'). It also notes that hidden folders are skipped. This distinguishes it from siblings like obsidian_read_note or obsidian_search_vault which have different purposes.

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 listing notes, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., when to use obsidian_search_vault instead). There is no mention of exclusions or comparisons with sibling tools.

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