Validate a proposed new note (anti-slop)

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

Discloses read-only and idempotent behavior aligning with annotations. Adds details: parses YAML, resolves wikilinks, checks tags/path collisions, returns errors/warnings/diagnostics. Clarifies always available without --enable-write.

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?

Description is front-loaded with purpose and contains informative sentences without fluff. Each sentence adds value, though could be slightly more concise.

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?

Covers what the tool does, returns, and prerequisites. Since no output schema exists, the description explains return types (errors/warnings/diagnostics). Lacks details on diagnostics structure but sufficient for an AI agent.

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 has 100% coverage, but description adds value by explaining default mode behavior ('create errors if path exists, overwrite/append allow existing') and tying parameters to workflow. Provides context beyond schema's basic descriptions.

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?

Clearly states 'Lint a draft note BEFORE writing' with specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from siblings by addressing the 'LLM-write pain' and listing specific checks (YAML, wikilinks, tags, collisions).

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 recommends when to use ('before writing') and provides 'Recommended workflow: validate → fix → obsidian_create_note.' Notes that it does not require --enable-write, but does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives.

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