Toggle Edit Mode

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

Adds essential behavioral details beyond annotations: 'UI-only: does not modify file contents', 'No-op when no file is active', and 'errors when the Local REST API plugin is unreachable'. It also specifies the exact return shape { ok: true, mode: 'edit' | 'preview' }. These details go well beyond the minimal readOnlyHint false, openWorldHint true in annotations.

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 front-loaded with the core action and then efficiently adds caveats (UI-only, no-op, error), a use case, and the vault.select clarification. Every sentence adds value, and the example is minimal. It is concise yet comprehensive for a tool of this simplicity.

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 description covers no-op behavior, error conditions, UI-only nature, target vault (via Local REST API), and the return structure. The output schema is present but the description already explains the return. The only minor omission is whether it works on non-markdown files, but that's likely implicit in Obsidian's context.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (empty properties). The description confirms 'Takes no arguments' and explains that it always toggles the current mode. Since there are no parameters to describe, the baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description adequately covers this.

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 'Flip the active file in Obsidian between edit (source) mode and preview (reading) mode.' It specifies the action, target, and scope. It also distinguishes itself from vault-related tools by explicitly noting it is not affected by vault.select, which prevents confusion among siblings.

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?

Provides a concrete use case: 'Useful when an agent has finished a multi-step edit and wants the user to see the rendered result.' It also indicates when it's a no-op (no active file) and warns about plugin unavailability. While it doesn't list alternative tools, the context is clear enough for an agent to decide when to invoke it.

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