Resolve wikilink

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description carries a lower burden. It adds context about handling various link formats, but does not disclose what happens on broken links, return value format, or behavior of include_content. Missing some behavioral details.

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?

The description is a single sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the main action and lists key features compactly.

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 the tool has no output schema, the description should ideally mention the return value (e.g., file path or content). It says 'resolve to a vault file' but does not specify what is returned. The include_content parameter's effect is not explained. Sibling tools list suggests it's a utility tool, but more detail on output would complete the picture.

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?

All parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the supported link syntax (aliases, sections, block refs, relative paths) beyond the schema examples, helping users understand format variants.

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 the tool resolves [[wikilink]] or ![[embed]] to a vault file, listing supported formats like aliases, sections, block refs, and relative paths. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like obsidian_read_note which read by path rather than resolving links.

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 when you have a wikilink string and need to find its file, but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives like obsidian_read_note for reading content after resolution. No exclusion criteria are provided.

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