obsidian_backlinks

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains that 'file' uses wikilink resolution and 'path' requires an exact path, but does not disclose behavior when both are provided, case sensitivity, or return format. This is partial transparency.

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 compact and well-structured, leading with a one-sentence purpose, followed by a clear parameter list and two practical examples. No unnecessary content.

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?

For a simple two-parameter optional tool, the description covers the primary usage well. It does not mention precedence when both parameters are supplied or output details, but the absence is acceptable given the tool's simplicity and the presence of examples.

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 only says 'File name' and 'File path', but the description adds meaningful semantics: 'note name (wikilink resolution)' vs 'exact file path'. This clarifies how each parameter is interpreted, going beyond the schema's basic labels.

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 'List backlinks to a note' with a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like obsidian_read or obsidian_search, which handle different operations.

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 provides clear context on how to use the tool with two optional parameters and examples. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, but the purpose is straightforward enough that guidance is implied.

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