Skip to main content
Glama

Revdoku

by com.revdoku

Bucket File List

bucket_file_list
Read-onlyIdempotent

List files in a Revdoku bucket. Pass limit and offset for paginated results; omit them to return all files for compatibility. Pass query to search by name/path, or folder to list one folder's files.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoOptional maximum files to return, up to 500. Omit to return all files for compatibility.
queryNoOptional case-insensitive contains-search over file names and paths.
folderNoOptional folder path to list only that folder's immediate files, name-ordered. Use "" or "/" for the bucket root.
offsetNoOptional zero-based offset. Use pagination.next_offset for the next page.
bucket_idYesRevdoku bucket id returned by bucket_list or bucket_get, for example bkt_...

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filesYes
paginationNo

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare this as a safe, read-only, idempotent operation. The description adds meaningful extra context: pagination behavior ('omit to return all files for compatibility'), the case-insensitive search behavior, and the name-ordered folder listing with bucket-root handling. This goes beyond the annotation hints and provides a richer behavioral picture.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is three sentences, front-loading the core purpose and quickly covering pagination, search, and folder filtering. Every sentence carries useful information with no fluff or redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With strong annotations (read-only, idempotent, non-destructive), a 100%-documented schema, and an output schema, the description fills the remaining gaps: pagination semantics, search/folder scope, and compatibility behavior. It is fully complete for an AI agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema already has 100% description coverage for all five parameters, including details like 'up to 500', 'omit to return all files', and 'case-insensitive contains-search'. The tool description largely restates these schema details, so it adds little new semantic value beyond the structured schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('List files') and the resource ('Revdoku bucket'), and it distinguishes itself from siblings like bucket_file_get and bucket_file_read by focusing on listing, plus it specifies additional filtering modes (query, folder).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives clear context on usage: pagination with limit/offset, omitting to return all files, searching by query, and folder filtering. It stops short of explicitly naming alternatives or stating when not to use, but the context is unmistakable and sufficient for proper selection.

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

All Revdoku toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but a few overlaps exist: bucket_file_move and bucket_file_rename both handle same-bucket renames/moves, and bucket_file_reorganize overlaps with copy/move operations. The detailed descriptions help clarify, but the boundaries aren't always obvious.

Naming Consistency4/5

The naming follows predictable patterns: bucket_<verb> for bucket-level actions, bucket_file_<verb> for file operations, bucket_publication_<verb> for publications, and website_preview_* for previews. Minor deviations like bucket_create_from_template, bucket_set_public_slug, and bucket_update_publication_access deviate slightly but remain readable.

Tool Count2/5

At 42 tools, the server is overweight for its scope. While the platform is feature-rich, many tools are narrowly specialized (e.g., bucket_publication_leads, bucket_lock_visibility_changes) and some are redundant (file_move vs file_rename vs file_reorganize), making the surface larger than necessary for an MCP server.

Completeness3/5

The tool set covers the full bucket lifecycle and most file operations, but there is no direct file delete tool (only via delete_missing in write_many or cross-bucket move soft-delete) and binary uploads are explicitly delegated to the CLI/REST. These are notable gaps for a complete file management workflow.

Resources