Skip to main content
Glama
rps321321

obsidian-mcp-pro

by rps321321
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Move/Rename Note

move_note
Destructive

Move or rename a note in an Obsidian vault while preserving its content, creating destination folders as needed, and updating wikilinks and file references to the new path.

Instructions

Move or rename a note within the vault, preserving its full content. Parent folders at the destination are created as needed. By default, wikilinks and file references are updated, matching Obsidian's "Automatically update internal links" behavior; this rewrite requires confirmPath to match the destination path after .md normalization. Pass updateLinks: false to skip the rewrite scan (faster on large vaults; pair with find_broken_links if you need to audit afterward). A .md extension is added automatically if omitted from either path.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
newPathYesDestination relative path from vault root (e.g., 'projects/idea.md'). Creates intermediate folders as needed.
oldPathYesCurrent relative path of the note from vault root (e.g., 'inbox/idea.md')
confirmPathNoRequired when updateLinks is true: re-type the destination path after .md normalization to confirm vault-wide reference rewriting.
updateLinksNoIf true (default), update every wikilink, markdown link, and canvas node reference across the vault to point at the new path. Set false to skip the rewrite pass.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv4.1.1
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / confirmPath
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Required when updateLinks is true: re-type the destination path after .md normalization to confirm vault-wide reference rewriting.",
+  "maxLength": 500,
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Addedv2.0.0
  3. Removedv1.9.0
  4. Changed1 schema field changedv1.5.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / updateLinks
      Added value: +{
+  "default": true,
+  "description": "If true (default), update every wikilink, markdown link, and canvas node reference across the vault to point at the new path. Set false to skip the rewrite pass.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  5. Addedv0.1.6
  6. Removedv0.1.4
  7. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.1.2
    • changedInput schema / properties / newPath / description
      Previous value: -"New relative path for the note"New value: +"Destination relative path from vault root (e.g., 'projects/idea.md'). Creates intermediate folders as needed."
    • changedInput schema / properties / oldPath / description
      Previous value: -"Current relative path of the note"New value: +"Current relative path of the note from vault root (e.g., 'inbox/idea.md')"
  8. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses substantial behavior beyond the annotations: parent folders are created, internal links are rewritten by default, confirmPath must match the normalized destination, updateLinks:false skips the rewrite scan, and .md extensions are auto-added. These are meaningful side effects for a destructive mutation tool, and the description does not contradict the destructiveHint annotation.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core action and follows with the most important behavioral details in a compact sequence. Every sentence adds operational value, including folder creation, link rewriting, confirmPath requirements, and the updateLinks tradeoff.

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 destructive move/rename tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the main behavioral concerns: link rewriting, folder creation, confirmPath, extension normalization, and an audit alternative. It omits what happens if the destination already exists, such as overwrite or collision behavior, which is important for a destructive move operation.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds valuable meaning beyond the schema: confirmPath must match the destination after .md normalization, updateLinks:false is faster on large vaults, and the agent may pair it with find_broken_links afterward. It also notes that .md extensions are added automatically if omitted, which the schema does not explicitly state for either path.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Move or rename a note within the vault, preserving its full content.' This is unambiguous and inherently distinct from sibling operations such as create_note, delete_note, or update_section. An agent can identify exactly what the tool does without reading the schema.

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?

Usage guidance is implied by 'Move or rename a note', and the description gives useful guidance for the updateLinks option, including pairing with find_broken_links for audits. However, it does not explicitly state when to use move_note versus alternatives or when not to use it, so selection guidance remains implied rather than explicit.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools