obsidian_get_note_metadata

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only states 'Returns JSON with note metadata' without disclosing behavior for missing notes, invalid paths, or required permissions. Minimal behavioral context beyond the action.

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 two sentences plus an Args section, front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

Tool is simple (2 params, no nesting) and has output schema, so description doesn't need to detail return structure. However, it lacks error behavior, auth context, and guidance on when to use among many similar sibling tools. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 0%, but description adds basic meaning: 'Name or path of the vault' for vault and 'Path to the note within the vault' for path. However, details like format or validation are missing, and the description could be more precise.

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 'Get metadata about a note including tags, links, word count, and frontmatter.' This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like obsidian_read_note (content) and obsidian_get_properties (only properties).

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like obsidian_get_properties or obsidian_read_note. The description implies it's for metadata, but does not state when not to use it or mention prerequisites.

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