Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Files.com MCP Server

Files.com MCP Server

Official
by Files-com
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

List For File History

List_For_File_History
Read-only

Retrieve the history of file changes with optional date filtering and pagination to track modifications over time.

Instructions

List history for specific file.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "List_For_File_History"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
start_atNoLeave blank or set to a date/time to filter earlier entries.
end_atNoLeave blank or set to a date/time to filter later entries.
displayNoDisplay format. Leave blank or set to `full` or `parent`.
cursorNoUsed for pagination. When a list request has more records available, cursors are provided in the response headers `X-Files-Cursor-Next` and `X-Files-Cursor-Prev`. Send one of those cursor value here to resume an existing list from the next available record. Note: many of our SDKs have iterator methods that will automatically handle cursor-based pagination.
per_pageNoNumber of records to show per page. (Max: 10000, 1,000 or less is recommended).
sort_byNoIf set, sort records by the specified field in either `asc` or `desc` direction. Valid fields are `created_at`.
pathNoPath to operate on.
fieldsNoOptional list of attribute names to include as columns in the response table. When omitted, a sensible default set is used. Useful for narrowing wide entities or surfacing fields not in the default.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.65

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the tool is known to be a read operation. The description adds no further behavioral context such as pagination, sorting, or filtering capabilities, which are available per the schema. It does not mention any side effects or limitations.

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 a single sentence, very concise. It communicates the core purpose without extraneous text. However, it lacks any structure or bullet points that could highlight key aspects.

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?

Given the 8 parameters and existence of an output schema, the description is minimal. It conveys the basic function but does not integrate parameter context or usage patterns. While the schema provides detailed parameter info, the description could better frame the tool's capabilities (e.g., filtering date range, pagination). The presence of an output schema partially mitigates the need for return value details.

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?

All parameters have detailed descriptions in the schema (100% coverage). The tool description does not add any additional information about parameters. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 description states it lists history for a specific file. The verb 'List' and resource 'history for specific file' clearly indicate the action. It distinguishes from siblings like List_For_Folder_History by specifying 'file' instead of 'folder'. However, it does not elaborate on what kind of history events are included.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like List_For_Folder_History or List_History. The description lacks context about prerequisites or conditions.

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