Skip to main content
Glama
AndersHsueh

AX Local Operations MCP Server

by AndersHsueh

file_watch

Read-only

Monitor files and directories for creation, deletion, and modification events. Supports recursive monitoring with depth limits to track changes in real-time.

Instructions

文件监控:监控文件或目录的创建、删除、修改事件。支持递归监控和深度限制。

示例:监控目录变化 { "path": "src", "events": "create,delete,modify", "duration": 60 } 示例:递归监控 { "path": "project", "events": "modify", "recursive": true, "max_depth": 3 }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes文件或目录的绝对路径,或相对于 working_directory 的相对路径
eventsNo监控的事件类型,可选值:create(创建)、delete(删除)、modify(修改),逗号分隔
durationNo监控持续时间(秒),0表示持续监控直到手动停止
recursiveNo是否递归处理子目录
max_depthNo最大递归深度,0表示不递归,默认8
output_formatNo输出格式:text(纯文本)、json(结构化JSON)、both(两者兼有)
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide safety information (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false), but the description adds valuable behavioral context: it mentions recursive monitoring capability, depth limitations, and the concept of duration-based monitoring (including '0表示持续监控直到手动停止' - 0 means continuous monitoring until manually stopped). This goes beyond what annotations provide about the tool's operational behavior.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is well-structured with a clear purpose statement followed by practical examples. Every sentence serves a purpose - the first explains functionality, the examples demonstrate usage patterns. It could be slightly more concise but remains efficient and front-loaded with essential information.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a monitoring tool with good annotations and complete schema coverage, the description provides adequate context. It explains the tool's behavior, shows usage patterns, and addresses key operational aspects. The main gap is the lack of output schema, but the description compensates somewhat by mentioning output_format parameter options.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents all 6 parameters thoroughly. The description's examples illustrate parameter usage patterns but don't add significant semantic meaning beyond what's in the schema. The baseline score of 3 is appropriate when schema coverage is complete.

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 tool's purpose with specific verbs ('监控' - monitor) and resources ('文件或目录' - files or directories), listing the exact event types (create, delete, modify). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like file_operation or file_edit by focusing on monitoring rather than manipulation.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description provides usage examples that imply when to use this tool (for monitoring file system events), but it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or mention alternatives among sibling tools. The examples show different monitoring scenarios but lack explicit guidance about tool selection.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/AndersHsueh/Ax-LocalTools-MCP'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server