Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Cloudreve MCP Server

Cloudreve MCP Server

by SanderCokart
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

rename_file

Rename a file or directory on Cloudreve by specifying its remote path and a new name.

Instructions

Rename a remote file or directory.

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>",
      "new_name": "<new_name>"
    },
    "name": "rename_file"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesRemote path or File URI
new_nameYesNew basename

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether renaming can overwrite an existing file, require specific permissions, or handle directories. For a renaming operation, this is a significant gap.

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 a single sentence with no wasted words. It conveys the essential action directly.

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?

Given the lack of output schema and minimal description, the tool definition is incomplete. Key details about behavior (overwrite, permissions, directory handling) are missing, making it less useful for an AI agent.

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 coverage is 100% (both parameters are described), so the description does not need to add extra meaning. It provides no additional context beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 explicitly states the verb 'rename' and the resource 'remote file or directory', distinguishing it from siblings like move_file or copy_file. It is specific and unambiguous.

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 rename_file versus alternatives like move_file (which changes location) or copy_file (duplicates). The description lacks context for tool selection.

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