Obsidian MCP (pgvector + Ollama, self-hosted)

List files

list_files

Read-onlyIdempotent

Browse vault files and folders directly, including non-markdown and binary files. Use it to list directory contents, filter by glob pattern, recurse into subfolders, and check file sizes before reading.

Instructions

Browse the vault filesystem (ls-style), including non-markdown files. Peer to list_notes, which lists indexed markdown only; list_files reads the filesystem directly and reports sizes so you can gauge a binary before read_file.

By default lists the immediate children of folder — subdirectories and files, each file with size and modification time. pattern is a glob that filters file entries (e.g. "*.pdf"); recursive=True descends into subfolders and returns matching files. Anything with a path component starting with . is hidden — dot-directories (.obsidian, .git, .trash, …) and dot-files — and a folder with such a component is rejected.

At most limit entries are returned (default 200, hard cap 1000); the response indicates when the listing was truncated.

Args: folder: Vault-relative folder (default "." = vault root). pattern: Glob applied to file names (default "*"). recursive: If True, descend into subfolders. Off by default. limit: Maximum entries to return (default 200, hard cap 1000).

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`limit`	No
`folder`	No	.
`pattern`	No	*
`recursive`	No

Output 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
```
Addedv0.4.0Jun 26, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds real behavior beyond them: dot-directories and dot-files are hidden, a `folder` containing a dot component is rejected, default limit 200 with a hard cap of 1000, and truncation is signaled in the response. Those are exactly the surprises an agent would otherwise hit.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with purpose and sibling disambiguation, then behavior, then a compact Args block. The one inefficiency is that defaults and meanings are stated both in the prose and again in the Args list, which is mild redundancy rather than bloat.

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?

For a four-param read-only listing tool with an output schema (so return shape needn't be spelled out), the description covers scope, filtering, recursion, hiding rules, limits, and truncation signaling. Nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry all parameter meaning — and it does, documenting all four params with defaults, glob semantics with an example ('*.pdf'), the effect of `recursive=True`, and the cap on `limit`. This fully compensates for the empty schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Browse the vault filesystem (`ls`-style)') and immediately contrasts it with the sibling `list_notes`, which lists indexed markdown only. It also names `read_file` as the natural follow-on, so an agent can distinguish all three without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly routes the agent: use this when you need raw filesystem contents including non-markdown, use `list_notes` for indexed markdown, and use this to gauge a binary's size before `read_file`. Both the selection condition and the downstream use case are stated.

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