Skip to main content
Glama

mv

Move or rename files and directories within virtual filesystem workspaces to organize content and manage storage across multiple providers.

Instructions

Move/rename file or directory.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sourceYes
destYes

Implementation Reference

  • Core implementation of the mv tool logic: resolves paths using workspace_manager and delegates the move operation to the underlying VFS, returning a MoveResponse.
    async def mv(self, source: str, dest: str) -> MoveResponse:
        """
        Move/rename file or directory.
    
        Args:
            source: Source path
            dest: Destination path
    
        Returns:
            MoveResponse with success status
        """
        vfs = self.workspace_manager.get_current_vfs()
        resolved_source = self.workspace_manager.resolve_path(source)
        resolved_dest = self.workspace_manager.resolve_path(dest)
    
        await vfs.mv(resolved_source, resolved_dest)
    
        return MoveResponse(success=True, source=resolved_source, dest=resolved_dest)
  • MCP tool registration for 'mv': thin wrapper that delegates to VFSTools.mv instance.
    @server.tool
    async def mv(source: str, dest: str):
        """Move/rename file or directory."""
        return await vfs_tools.mv(source, dest)
  • Pydantic model defining the output schema for the mv tool response.
    class MoveResponse(BaseModel):
        """Response from mv operation"""
    
        success: bool
        source: str
        dest: str
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. While 'Move/rename' implies a destructive operation (source is removed), it doesn't specify whether overwrites occur, if permissions are preserved, or what happens on failure. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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?

The description is extremely concise at just four words, front-loading the core functionality with zero wasted text. Every word earns its place by conveying essential information about the tool's purpose.

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 2 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, error conditions, or important behavioral details like overwrite behavior. The description should provide more context given the complexity and lack of structured documentation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It mentions 'source' and 'dest' implicitly but provides no details about their format (paths, wildcards), semantics (relative vs absolute paths), or constraints. The description adds minimal value beyond what the parameter names already suggest.

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 verb ('Move/rename') and resource ('file or directory'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'cp' (copy) or 'rm' (remove), which would require explicit comparison to achieve a perfect score.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when to prefer 'mv' over 'cp' followed by 'rm', or how it differs from workspace operations like 'workspace_mount'. No context about prerequisites or exclusions is provided.

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/IBM/chuk-mcp-vfs'

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