Skip to main content
Glama

server_update_file

Modify configuration files on a Minecraft server managed by crafty-mcp, such as server.properties or whitelist.json, to adjust server settings or permissions.

Instructions

Write or update a file on the Minecraft server (e.g., server.properties, ops.json, whitelist.json)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
server_idYesServer ID or UUID
pathYesRelative file path
contentsYesNew file contents
overwriteNoOverwrite even if file was modified externally

Implementation Reference

  • Implementation of the server_update_file tool, which uses the client.patch method to update file contents on the Minecraft server.
    server.tool(
      "server_update_file",
      "Write or update a file on the Minecraft server (e.g., server.properties, ops.json, whitelist.json)",
      {
        server_id: z.string().describe("Server ID or UUID"),
        path: z.string().describe("Relative file path"),
        contents: z.string().describe("New file contents"),
        overwrite: z
          .boolean()
          .default(false)
          .describe("Overwrite even if file was modified externally"),
      },
      async ({ server_id, path, contents, overwrite }) => {
        try {
          const data = await client.patch(`/servers/${server_id}/files`, {
            path,
            contents,
            overwrite,
          });
          return { content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(data, null, 2) }] };
        } catch (error) {
          const msg = error instanceof Error ? error.message : String(error);
          return { content: [{ type: "text", text: `Error: ${msg}` }], isError: true };
        }
      }
    );
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool can 'write or update' files, which implies mutation, but doesn't specify permissions required, whether changes are reversible, potential side effects, or error conditions. The example file types hint at configuration files, but no further behavioral context is given.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. It includes helpful examples without unnecessary elaboration. Every word earns its place, though it could be slightly more structured with usage context.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what happens on success/failure, return values, error conditions, or important behavioral aspects like whether the server restarts after file changes. Given the complexity of file operations on a live server, more context is needed.

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 parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema—it mentions 'Minecraft server' context and example file types, which provides some semantic context for the 'path' parameter, but doesn't elaborate on parameter interactions or usage patterns.

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 clearly states the action ('Write or update a file') and specifies the target resource ('on the Minecraft server'), with examples of common file types. It distinguishes from siblings like server_create_file (which likely creates new files) and server_get_file (which reads files), but doesn't explicitly contrast them.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like server_create_file or server_rename_file. The description implies it's for modifying existing files or writing new ones, but doesn't clarify prerequisites, constraints, or when other tools might be more appropriate.

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/HadiCherkaoui/crafty-mcp'

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