List Obsidian Canvas (.canvas) files

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

Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent. The description adds detail about node/edge counts and confirms read-only. This is consistent and adds some context, but does not go beyond what annotations provide.

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

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

Two sentences with no wasted text. The first sentence conveys the core purpose and features; the second provides the use case. Very efficient.

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

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

Given simplicity (2 params, no output schema, clear annotations), the description is nearly complete. It could optionally mention the return format (e.g., path and counts), but this is not critical for a listing tool.

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

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

Schema coverage is 100%; both parameters have clear descriptions. The description adds no parameter-specific details beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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

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

The description clearly states it lists .canvas files with node/edge counts, and it distinguishes from sibling tool 'obsidian_read_canvas' by positioning itself as a discovery step.

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

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

Explicitly advises using this tool before calling obsidian_read_canvas, providing a clear workflow. It also mentions honoring global flags, though it doesn't explicitly exclude other use cases. A minor improvement would be specifying 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.