markdown-vault-mcp

Outlinks

get_outlinks

Read-onlyIdempotent

List the outbound links in a Markdown note, flagging any whose target file is missing so you can spot broken references before publishing.

Instructions

List the links in a note, each with an exists flag that is false when the target is missing.

Use get_context when you also need its backlinks or similar notes.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`path`	Yes	Path of the note holding the links, such as `"notes/topic.md"`; case-sensitive.
`limit`	No	Maximum outlinks to return; omit for all.
`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
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv6.1.0Nov 2, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / limit / description

Previous value: -"Maximum number of outlinks to return. Omitted (the\ndefault) returns all."New value: +"Maximum outlinks to return; omit for all."

changedInput schema / properties / path / description

Previous value: -"Relative path of the source document (e.g.\n\"notes/topic.md\"). Case-sensitive."New value: +"Path of the note holding the links, such as `\"notes/topic.md\"`;\ncase-sensitive."

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

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the missing-target behavior via the exists flag, but says nothing about ordering, truncation, or the stale-index path exposed by wait_for_pending_writes, leaving most behavioral burden on the schema.

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?

Two short sentences with zero filler, and the core purpose plus the missing-target caveat are front-loaded before the alternative-tool pointer. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a three-parameter read-only tool with an output schema and full annotation coverage, this is nearly sufficient: what it returns and when to prefer it are both stated. The only omission is that the dedicated get_backlinks sibling is not acknowledged as the alternative for the backlink case it mentions.

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%, including the case-sensitivity of path, the default-for-all semantics of limit, and the timeout/staleness behavior of wait_for_pending_writes. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List the links in a note") and adds a concrete return-field semantic (an exists flag that is false for missing targets). It also names a distinct sibling, so an agent can tell it apart from the context-aggregating tool without opening either schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives an explicit routing rule: use get_context when backlinks or similar notes are also needed, implying this tool is the narrow outlinks-only choice. It stops short of a full when-not list and never mentions get_backlinks, which is the more direct sibling for the backlink case, so the guidance is helpful but not exhaustive.

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