obsidian_get_vault_info

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

Without annotations, the description clearly states the return format (JSON with vault path, note count, and folder structure). It also implies a read-only operation. This provides reasonable behavioral insight, though it could mention that it requires the vault to exist.

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 extremely concise: a one-sentence summary plus two lines for Args and Returns. Perfectly front-loaded with no unnecessary words.

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 simple tool (one parameter, output schema exists), the description covers the essential input and output. It could benefit from noting that the vault must be accessible, but overall it is sufficient.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, but the description's Args section clarifies that 'vault' can be a 'Name or path of the vault.' This adds meaning beyond the schema, which only specifies type 'string' and title.

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 it 'get[s] detailed information about a specific vault.' This verb+resource phrase is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like obsidian_get_vault_stats (aggregate stats) and obsidian_list_vaults (list vaults).

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description simply explains what it does without suggesting scenarios or exclusion criteria.

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