markdown-vault-mcp

Connection Path

get_connection_path

Read-onlyIdempotent

Finds the shortest link chain between two notes by following links in either direction, so you can trace how ideas connect.

Instructions

Find the shortest chain of links between two notes, following links in either direction.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`source`	Yes	Path of the starting note, such as `"Ideas/spark.md"`.
`target`	Yes	Path of the destination note.
`max_depth`	No	Most links to follow, 1 to 10 (default 10).
`wait_for_pending_writes`	No	Wait for recent index writes. On timeout, answer from the current index with _meta.index_stale=true. Default false.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv6.1.0Nov 2, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / max_depth / description

Previous value: -"Maximum number of hops to search. Default 10, max 10."New value: +"Most links to follow, 1 to 10 (default 10)."

changedInput schema / properties / source / description

Previous value: -"Vault-relative path of the starting note (e.g. 'Ideas/spark.md')."New value: +"Path of the starting note, such as `\"Ideas/spark.md\"`."

changedInput schema / properties / target / description

Previous value: -"Vault-relative path of the destination note."New value: +"Path of the destination note."

Changed1 schema field changedv5.0.0Sep 15, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / wait_for_pending_writes / description

Previous value: -"When True, wait until your recent\ndocument mutations have been applied to the\nindex before answering, so the results reflect those changes.\nUse it right after modifying notes when this read must see\nthem (e.g. right after a document mutation whose\neffect this read should reflect). Default\nFalse answers immediately from the current index — almost\nalways already up to date; inspect the response's\n``_meta.index_stale`` field to tell whether a write was still\nin flight. Bounded by a server timeout (default 60s); on\ntimeout it answers from the current index rather than waiting\nlonger."New value: +"Wait for recent index writes. On timeout, answer from the current index with _meta.index_stale=true. Default false."

Changed1 schema field changedv4.0.0Aug 26, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / wait_for_pending_writes / description

Previous value: -"When True, wait until your recent\nwrite/edit/delete/rename operations have been applied to the\nindex before answering, so the results reflect those changes.\nUse it right after modifying notes when this read must see\nthem (e.g. right after a write/edit/delete/rename whose\neffect this read should reflect). Default\nFalse answers immediately from the current index — almost\nalways already up to date; inspect the response's\n``_meta.index_stale`` field to tell whether a write was still\nin flight. Bounded by a server timeout (default 60s); on\ntimeout it answers from the current index rather than waiting\nlonger."New value: +"When True, wait until your recent\ndocument mutations have been applied to the\nindex before answering, so the results reflect those changes.\nUse it right after modifying notes when this read must see\nthem (e.g. right after a document mutation whose\neffect this read should reflect). Default\nFalse answers immediately from the current index — almost\nalways already up to date; inspect the response's\n``_meta.index_stale`` field to tell whether a write was still\nin flight. Bounded by a server timeout (default 60s); on\ntimeout it answers from the current index rather than waiting\nlonger."

First observedv3.1.0Jul 8, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: traversal is bidirectional and returns the shortest chain (implying breadth-first search). However, it says nothing about what happens when no path exists or when max_depth is exhausted.

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?

A single tight sentence with no filler, front-loading the verb and the result ('shortest chain') before the traversal qualifier.

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

Completeness4/5

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

An output schema exists and the input schema is fully documented, so the description need not explain returns. The one meaningful omission is failure semantics — whether a missing path yields an empty result or an error — which matters for a graph traversal bounded by max_depth.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100% and every parameter is documented inline, including the wait_for_pending_writes staleness semantics, so the baseline is 3. The description adds only the directional meaning of the traversal, not any parameter-level detail such as path formatting or depth-limit behavior.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Find the shortest chain of links between two notes') and adds the key scoping detail 'following links in either direction', which distinguishes path-finding from the one-directional, single-hop siblings like get_backlinks and get_outlinks.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The 'between two notes' framing implies the use case, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no named alternatives (e.g., use get_backlinks for a single hop). The agent must infer selection logic from the sibling list.

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