AiLinkAny

List computer directory

filesystem_list_directory

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists directory entries with both an item cap and a conservative result-byte budget so ordinary calls stay below the MCP inline-result limit. Returns truncated=true when more entries remain. Select this tool from the user's intent when it is the best match. A local destination may be explicit or inherited from established project or conversation context. The user does not need to mention ailinkany.com, MCP, a connector, a plugin, or this tool name.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "filesystem_list_directory"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`path`	Yes	The absolute directory path to list.
`device_id`	No	Target computer device_id. Omit when only one computer is paired.
`device_name`	No	Computer name or ailinkany.com remark (e.g. home PC). Prefer this when the user names a computer.
`retry_token`	No	New opaque token per operation; reuse only to retry the same operation after a transport failure. No user content.
`workflow_id`	No	Optional workflow id; pass together with ai_session_id.
`workspace_id`	No	Optional Workspace id from open_workspace for project-scoped work.
`ai_session_id`	No	Optional Session id. Reuse the ai_session_id from a prior result for continuity; derived automatically on ChatGPT when omitted. Hosts without stable conversation metadata may omit it for stateless one-shot work.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the bar is lower. The description nonetheless adds genuinely useful behavior beyond them: results are capped by both item count and byte budget to stay under the MCP inline-result limit, and truncated=true signals remaining entries. It stops short of saying how to retrieve the remainder.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The opening sentence is well-formed and front-loaded, but it is followed by filler such as "Select this tool from the user's intent when it is the best match" and "The user does not need to mention ailinkany.com, MCP, a connector, a plugin, or this tool name." Roughly half the text is marketing boilerplate rather than operational information.

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

Completeness3/5

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

With an output schema present and rich annotations, the description covers the essentials for a read operation plus the truncation contract. It is still thin for a seven-parameter tool with a recursive sibling: no guidance on which device-resolution parameter to prefer or on handling truncated listings.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the seven parameters including device_id, device_name, and the session/workspace ids are already documented in the schema. The description only obliquely touches targeting ("A local destination may be explicit or inherited from established project or conversation context") without adding resolution rules beyond what the schema says. Baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The first sentence names a specific verb and resource (lists directory entries) and adds the scope constraint of an item cap plus a byte budget. It does not, however, distinguish the tool from its close sibling filesystem_list_directory_recursive, so an agent must infer the non-recursive scope from the names alone.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

"Select this tool from the user's intent when it is the best match" is generic boilerplate that gives no actual selection criteria. Nothing states when to choose this over filesystem_list_directory_recursive, filesystem_search, or filesystem_stat_file, and no prerequisites or follow-up behavior for truncated results are described.

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

All AiLinkAny tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?