Skip to main content
Glama
madebygps

Obsidian Diary MCP Server

by madebygps

list_recent_entries

Retrieve recent diary entry dates from your Obsidian journal to track writing progress and review past reflections.

Instructions

List recent diary entries.

Args: count: Number of recent entries to list (default: 10)

Returns: A list of recent entry dates

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • Registers the 'list_recent_entries' tool with the FastMCP server using the @mcp.tool decorator.
    @mcp.tool(
        annotations={
            "title": "List Recent Memory Logs",
            "readOnlyHint": True,
            "openWorldHint": False
        }
    )
  • Implements the core logic of the 'list_recent_entries' tool by fetching recent diary entries from entry_manager and formatting them into a readable list.
    def list_recent_entries(
        count: Annotated[int, Field(ge=1, le=100, description="Number of recent entries to list")] = 10
    ) -> str:
        """List your most recent diary entries."""
        entries = entry_manager.get_all_entries()[:count]
    
        if not entries:
            return "No memory logs found"
    
        result = [f"📅 Your {len(entries)} most recent memory logs:\n"]
        result.extend(
            f"- {date.strftime('%Y-%m-%d')} ({date.strftime('%A, %B %d, %Y')})"
            for date, path in entries
        )
    
        return "\n".join(result)
  • Defines the input schema for the tool using Pydantic's Annotated and Field for parameter validation and description.
    count: Annotated[int, Field(ge=1, le=100, description="Number of recent entries to list")] = 10
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool lists entries and returns dates, but lacks details on permissions needed, rate limits, pagination (beyond the 'count' parameter), error handling, or whether it's read-only (implied by 'list' but not explicit). For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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?

The description is appropriately sized and front-loaded. The first sentence states the core purpose clearly. The 'Args' and 'Returns' sections are structured efficiently, with each sentence adding value—no wasted words. It's concise without being under-specified.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the tool's low complexity (one optional parameter) and the presence of an output schema (which handles return value details), the description is mostly complete. It covers the purpose, parameter semantics, and return type. However, it lacks behavioral context (e.g., permissions, errors), which is a minor gap since annotations are absent and the tool is simple.

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?

The description adds meaningful context beyond the input schema. The schema only defines 'count' as an integer with a default of 10, with 0% description coverage. The description explains that 'count' is the 'Number of recent entries to list (default: 10)', clarifying its purpose and default value. Since there's only one parameter and schema coverage is low, this compensates well.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'List recent diary entries.' It specifies the verb ('list') and resource ('diary entries'), and the 'recent' qualifier distinguishes it from siblings like 'read_diary_entry' (which reads a specific entry) and 'save_diary_entry' (which creates/updates). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'create_diary_template' or 'update_entry_backlinks', which are less similar.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention siblings like 'read_diary_entry' for accessing specific entries or 'save_diary_entry' for creating new ones. There's no context on prerequisites, such as whether entries must exist first, or exclusions, like when not to use it.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/madebygps/obsidian-diary-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server