List notes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, so safety is clear. The description adds useful behavioral context: it returns specific fields (title, path, frontmatter, tags, mtime) and ordering (newest first), which helps the agent understand what to expect.

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, front-loaded with purpose and key features. Every sentence provides essential information with no redundancy.

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?

The description covers return fields and ordering. Since no output schema exists, this is valuable. It could be slightly improved by noting default limit (50) or behavior with no filters, but overall it is sufficiently complete for a list tool with 4 parameters.

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 description coverage is 100% (all 4 parameters have descriptions). The description mentions the filtering options but does not add new semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 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?

Description clearly states the verb 'List', resource 'notes in the vault', and specifies filtering options and return fields. It distinguishes from siblings like obsidian_search or obsidian_frontmatter_search by focusing on listing with filters.

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?

The description implies usage for listing notes with optional filters, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use search vs list). No exclusions or when-not guidance is provided.

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