obsidian_set_properties

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It does not disclose whether properties are overwritten or merged, prerequisites like note existence or vault being open, or any side effects. The description lacks critical behavioral context.

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 brief and front-loaded with the main purpose, but the docstring-style 'Args' and 'Returns' sections add slight redundancy. Still, it is efficient with minimal waste.

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 tool sets multiple properties, the description lacks explanation of return values (though output schema exists), prerequisites, and behavior on existing properties. It is incomplete for reliable agent invocation.

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 description adds some meaning by explaining 'vault' as name or path, 'path' as note path, and 'properties' as a JSON object, but with 0% schema description coverage, it should provide more detail, such as the key-value format or accepted property types.

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 the verb 'set' and the resource 'multiple frontmatter properties on a note at once', distinguishing it from the sibling obsidian_set_property which sets a single property.

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?

The description implies use for setting multiple properties at once, providing clear context that it's a batch operation, though it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or list exclusions.

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