Obsidian MCP (pgvector + Ollama, self-hosted)

get_vault_guide

Get a two-part guide covering Obsidian syntax and vault conventions defined in CLAUDE.md, with instructions to create CLAUDE.md if absent.

Instructions

Returns a two-part guide for working with this Obsidian vault:

Obsidian primer — generic syntax (wikilinks, embeds, block refs, heading refs, tags, frontmatter, callouts, comments, highlights, math, mermaid, footnotes, tasks, plugin literals).
Vault-specific conventions — folder structure, naming rules, frontmatter requirements, and tag taxonomy as configured by the vault owner in CLAUDE.md. If CLAUDE.md is absent, the response includes instructions for creating one.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.8.2Sep 24, 2026
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
First observedMay 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly mentions the behavior when CLAUDE.md is absent (includes instructions for creating one), adding valuable behavioral context beyond the basic 'returns a guide' statement.

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 well-structured with a clear numbered list, front-loading the main purpose and then detailing the two components. Every sentence adds value, and it is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 the zero parameters and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete. It covers what the guide contains, the two parts, and the behavior when CLAUDE.md is absent, leaving no critical gaps for an agent to call it correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema provides no parameter documentation. The description compensates by fully explaining what the return value contains, making the tool's interface clear despite the lack of 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?

The description clearly states the tool returns a two-part guide for the Obsidian vault, specifying the primer and vault-specific conventions. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on documentation/reference rather than direct file operations.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It provides clear context on what the tool does and its components, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or alternatives. The intended use is implied as a general reference for vault conventions.

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