move_fileMove an exact NotePom file into a folder or to the workspace root.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| fileId | Yes | ||
| folderId | Yes | ||
| idempotencyKey | Yes | ||
| expectedUpdatedAt | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| moved | Yes | ||
| fileId | Yes | ||
| folderId | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already convey readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds contextual value by specifying the operation is a move to either a folder or the workspace root, but it does not disclose potential conflict behavior, permission requirements, or effects on the file's previous location.
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 sentence with no filler, and the core action is front-loaded. However, it is so terse that it omits useful parameter or usage context, so it is concise but not fully appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.
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?
With four parameters, zero schema descriptions, and no usage differentiation from move_workspace_item, this description is not complete enough for an agent to invoke the tool confidently. The output schema reduces the need to describe return values, but parameter semantics, especially idempotencyKey, remain unexplained.
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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It only loosely implies folderId's role via 'folder or workspace root' and does not explain idempotencyKey or expectedUpdatedAt, which are non-obvious and required or meaningful for correctness.
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 ('Move') and resource ('an exact NotePom file') and identifies the destination ('into a folder or to the workspace root'). It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like move_workspace_item, but the 'NotePom file' focus makes its primary purpose reasonably clear.
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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as move_workspace_item or trash_file. It does not mention prerequisites, when a move is appropriate, or what distinguishes this operation from similar sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools target a distinct resource and action, and lifecycle pairs like publish_note_listing vs publish_media_listing or get_note vs get_collaboration_note are separated by clear wording. A few near-pairs such as move_file vs move_workspace_item and trash_file vs trash_workspace_item could still cause an agent to pick the wrong tool without careful reading.
All 38 tools follow one consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern with no camelCase or mixed conventions. Even less common verbs like upsert, trash, purge, and validate are applied uniformly, making the tool set predictable.
38 tools is well above the 25+ threshold and makes the overall surface feel heavy for tool selection. The number is defensible given the broad workspace, collaboration, and marketplace scope, but as a single MCP server it is not especially well-scoped.
The tool set covers workspace content lifecycle, collaboration, public pages, marketplace listings, Stripe seller flow, and agent registration without major dead ends. Minor gaps exist, such as no permanent delete outside of the trash flow and no direct collaboration-note deletion, but core workflows are supported.