obsidian_recents

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It discloses that the tool returns files ordered by last access time and scoped to the vault, which implies a read-only operation. It does not specify maximum count or return format, but for a zero-parameter list tool this is adequate.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action ('List recently opened files') and adds a concise clarification about ordering. Every word contributes, with no redundancy or filler.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description provides the essential return information: a list of recently opened files in the vault, ordered by last access time. It lacks an explicit limit on the number of items returned, but this is a minor gap given the tool's simplicity.

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 input schema has no parameters, so the description cannot add parameter-level semantics beyond the schema. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description appropriately focuses on the resource and output rather than parameters.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('List') and resource ('recently opened files' in the vault), and specifies the ordering by last access time. This sufficiently distinguishes it from sibling tools like obsidian_files (list all files) and obsidian_read (read a specific file).

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 usage for retrieving recently opened files but offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like obsidian_history or obsidian_files. It provides clear context but no exclusions or comparison with sibling tools.

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