Skip to main content
Glama
maxkuminov

Obsidian MCP (pgvector + Ollama, self-hosted)

by maxkuminov

request_upload

Generate a secure, single-use upload link that lets another person place a file directly into an Obsidian vault at a specified path, with optional overwrite protection and expiry.

Instructions

Get a short-lived link a person can use to put a file into the vault. Requires a readwrite API key. Peer to write_file, which takes the bytes directly — use this one when you do not have them.

No MCP client can hand a tool the bytes of a file the user is looking at, and your shell cannot reach their machine. This mints a link bound to exactly one destination path: hand it to the person you are helping, they open it and pick a file, and it lands at path. Nothing else can be written with it.

The token lives in the URL's # fragment, which browsers never send to a server, so it stays out of access logs. Treat the whole URL as a secret — whoever holds it can write that one path, once, until it expires. Never put it in a query string: that would log it.

Single use, and no-clobber unless you ask otherwise. With overwrite=True the link also remembers what the file looked like now and refuses to publish if it changed in the meantime, so a stale link cannot silently undo an edit someone made while it was waiting.

From a shell you can upload without the page: curl -H "Authorization: Bearer <token>" -T <file> <base>/transfer/upload.

Then call check_upload(upload_id) to confirm the bytes landed and get their sha256. See get_vault_guide for how files fit into the vault.

Args: path: Vault-relative destination (e.g. "Attachments/photo.png"). overwrite: If True, allow replacing an existing file at path. expires_in: Seconds until the link dies. Clamped to 60–3600; defaults to TRANSFER_TOKEN_TTL_SECONDS (600).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes
overwriteNo
expires_inNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and delivers richly: single-use, no-clobber behavior, overwrite with optimistic concurrency, token in URL fragment to avoid logging, secrecy requirement, expiry clamping and defaults, and API key requirement. It discloses security implications and failure-prevention behavior well beyond basic mutation.

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 sentence adds value: purpose, why not write_file, security rationale, usage constraints, shell example, follow-up step, and argument semantics. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and structured logically from 'what' to 'when' to 'how'. No filler or tautology.

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 3-param tool with no annotations, the description is comprehensive: it explains the tool's role relative to write_file and check_upload, security model, lifecycle (single use, expiration), overwrite concurrency, and even provides a curl example. It also points to related tools for further context. The output schema exists and the description correctly hints at returning an upload_id, leaving return details to the schema.

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. It does: path gets a vault-relative example, overwrite gets a clear explanation of replacement semantics, expires_in gets range clamping and default value. Each param gains meaningful context not present in the 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?

The description opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Get a short-lived link a person can use to put a file into the vault.' It also explicitly contrasts with sibling tool write_file ('Peer to write_file, which takes the bytes directly — use this one when you do not have them'), making the tool's scope and differentiation clear.

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?

The description explicitly states when to use this tool ('use this one when you do not have them'), explains why (MCP clients cannot hand bytes, shell cannot reach user's machine), and names alternative paths ('Peer to write_file', 'Then call check_upload', 'See get_vault_guide'). It provides both a direct alternative and follow-up steps, giving clear usage context.

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/maxkuminov/obsidian-mcp'

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