obsidian_move_note

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, and the description adds substantial value beyond that: it warns that wikilinks are NOT rewritten, states that destination folders are created as needed, and documents the return JSON shape and backend values. This is precisely the kind of behavioral context an agent needs.

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 well-structured: main operation first, then the critical caveat, then parameters, then return contract. Every sentence earns its place, and the format is easy to scan.

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?

The definition covers move/rename semantics, folder creation, link-rewrite behavior, core parameters, and the exact success and failure return shapes. For a mutation tool with annotations and an output schema, this is complete enough for correct 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 Args section explains source, destination, and overwrite, but it omits the optional vault parameter. With the context signal reporting 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate for all parameters, so covering 3 of 4 is helpful but incomplete.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Move or rename a note.' It also adds a distinguishing behavior, 'creating destination folders as needed,' which makes the operation unambiguous against siblings like write, delete, or append.

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?

There is no explicit guidance about when to choose this tool over alternatives such as obsidian_write_note or obsidian_delete_note, and no excluded cases are mentioned. The 'Search for links... afterwards' note is post-action advice, not usage direction.

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