Skip to main content
Glama
maxkuminov

Obsidian MCP (pgvector + Ollama, self-hosted)

by maxkuminov

request_download

Generate a temporary download link for a vault file, enabling secure sharing of large or non-text files like PDFs or images. The link expires and binds to the current file version.

Instructions

Get a short-lived link a person can use to save a vault file. Peer to read_file, which returns the bytes to you — use this one when the file is for the human, not for you.

Handy for anything read_file would waste context on or cannot render: a PDF, a large image, an archive. Reading works with a read-only key.

The token lives in the URL's # fragment, so it never reaches an access log. Treat the whole URL as a secret — whoever holds it can read that one file until it expires. Never put it in a query string.

The link is bound to the file as it is now: if it is edited or replaced, the link stops working rather than serving different content than you described. Unlike an upload link it can be used more than once, so the person can preview and then save.

From a shell: `curl -H "Authorization: Bearer " -o

Args: path: Vault-relative path of the file to share. expires_in: Seconds until the link dies. Clamped to 60–3600; defaults to TRANSFER_TOKEN_TTL_SECONDS (600). A link can never outlive the credential you are calling with, so the deadline in the result may be earlier than you asked for — it says so when that happens.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes
expires_inNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.8.2
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  2. Addedv0.7.0

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the token lives in the URL fragment to avoid access logs, that the URL must be treated as a secret, that the link is bound to the file's current state and stops working if edited, and that expiry is clamped. This is rich, security-relevant behavioral context beyond what structured fields could provide.

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 long but every section earns its place: purpose first, then usage context, security warning, link lifecycle, and parameter details. Important warnings are front-loaded before the shell example and Args, making the structure effective for agent comprehension.

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?

The description is complete for a tool of this complexity. It covers purpose, selection criteria, security model, expiration behavior, parameter meanings, and even a curl example. An output schema exists, so return values do not need to be explained in the description.

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 compensate, and it does. The Args section defines path as a Vault-relative path and expires_in with units, default, clamping range (60–3600), and the relationship to credential lifetime. This fully explains the parameter semantics.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get a short-lived link a person can use to save a vault file.' It explicitly contrasts itself with read_file, making the tool's role clear and differentiating it from sibling tools without requiring the agent to inspect schemas.

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?

It states exactly when to use this tool ('use this one when the file is for the human, not for you'), gives concrete examples where read_file would be unsuitable (PDF, large image, archive), and contrasts it with upload links by noting repeated use. This is explicit when/when-not guidance.

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