Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
canvaskeep-mcp

canvaskeep-mcp

Official
by CanvasKeep
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

list_folders

Retrieve all folders in a workspace with their IDs and names. Use the folder IDs to create diagrams inside specific folders.

Instructions

List all folders in a workspace. Returns each folder's id, name, and parent_folder_id. Use folder ids when creating diagrams inside a specific folder.

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": {
      "workspace_id": "<workspace_id>"
    },
    "name": "list_folders"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
workspace_idYesThe workspace UUID to list folders from

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.6.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the return shape (id, name, parent_folder_id), which compensates for the missing output schema, but says nothing about pagination, ordering, empty results, or required permissions for a read-only listing.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: purpose, return shape, and downstream usage. No filler or redundancy.

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 simple one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, return fields, and usage adequately. Only minor gaps remain around result ordering or size limits.

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% and there is a single documented workspace_id parameter, so the schema already does the work. The description adds no format or constraint detail beyond it, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List all folders in a workspace') and goes further by naming the exact fields returned. An agent can distinguish it from create_folder and list_diagrams without opening any schema.

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 final sentence gives downstream guidance ('Use folder ids when creating diagrams inside a specific folder'), which implies the why but not an explicit when-to-use-vs-alternatives rule. No exclusion conditions or prerequisites are stated.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools