List orphan notes

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows it's a safe read operation. The description adds that it finds notes without incoming links, which specifies the exact behavior beyond the annotation. No contradictions or missing behavioral traits.

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 a single, clear sentence that directly states the tool's purpose with no extraneous information. Every word earns its place.

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 simplicity of the tool (no output schema, one optional parameter), the description is largely complete. However, it could briefly mention the return format (e.g., a list of note names) to improve completeness.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% for the single optional parameter 'vault,' and its description in the schema is sufficient. The tool description does not add any additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 uses a specific verb 'Finds' and a clear resource 'notes that have no incoming wikilinks.' It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'obsidian_get_backlinks' (returns backlinks for a specific note) and 'obsidian_list_unresolved' (lists broken links).

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 the tool is for identifying orphan notes but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives. No guidance on when not to use or context for choosing between this and 'obsidian_get_backlinks' or 'obsidian_search.'

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