MCP X-Platform

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

analyze_file_paths

Detect cross-platform file path issues by analyzing case sensitivity, path separators, and Windows reserved names to ensure compatibility across Windows, macOS, and Linux.

Instructions

Analyze file system paths for cross-platform compatibility issues

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": "analyze_file_paths"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`path`	Yes	Directory or file path to analyze
`checkSeparators`	No	Check path separator usage
`checkReservedNames`	No	Check for Windows reserved names
`checkCaseSensitivity`	No	Check for case sensitivity issues

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 13, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must detail behavior but only gives a high-level purpose. It does not mention what checks are performed, output format, or side effects.

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?

Description is a single sentence, very concise and front-loaded. However, it could be expanded with usage guidance without losing conciseness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Tool has 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. Description lacks information about output, typical use cases, and relationship to siblings, making it incomplete.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all parameters. The tool description adds no additional param semantics beyond the 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?

Description clearly states verb 'Analyze', resource 'file system paths', and purpose 'for cross-platform compatibility issues'. It is distinct from sibling tools which focus on other aspects like build systems or encoding.

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?

Description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or any context for invocation.

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

Deploy Server