Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-audit

mcp-audit

by P4ST4S
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Hybrid

Create Directory

create_directory
Idempotent

Creates a new directory or ensures it exists, including nested paths, for setting up project structures or required directories.

Instructions

Create a new directory or ensure a directory exists. Can create multiple nested directories in one operation. If the directory already exists, this operation will succeed silently. Perfect for setting up directory structures for projects or ensuring required paths exist. Only works within allowed directories.

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": "create_directory"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contentYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Adds significant behavioral details beyond annotations: nested directory creation, silent success on existing directory, and workspace restrictions. Annotations only say idempotent and not read-only, so description enriches understanding.

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?

Extremely concise: 5 sentences, front-loaded with action, no redundant words. Every sentence adds value.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's simplicity (1 parameter, idempotent, non-destructive), the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, behavior, usage example, and constraints. Output schema exists, so return value details are not needed.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The description adds meaning to the 'path' parameter by implying support for nested paths and scoping to allowed directories. With 0% schema coverage, this is helpful, though more specifics on path format would be ideal.

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?

The description clearly states the tool creates new directories or ensures they exist, using specific verbs and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools focused on files by explicitly mentioning directory creation and structure setup.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides clear context for use ('setting up directory structures', 'ensuring required paths exist') and includes a constraint ('only works within allowed directories'). However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool.

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