file-analysis-mcp
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| prompts | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| resources | {
"subscribe": false,
"listChanged": false
} |
| experimental | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| list_folder_structureA | 지정한 폴더를 재귀적으로 탐색해 트리 구조, 확장자별 파일 개수, 총 용량을 JSON 문자열로 반환한다. |
| read_documentA | 지정한 문서 파일(PDF, PPTX, DOCX, SVG, 이미지)의 내용을 읽어 텍스트/이미지로 반환한다. 반환된 텍스트/이미지를 바탕으로 호출자가 직접 요약을 수행해야 한다. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct responsibilities: one summarizes folder structure and statistics, while the other extracts content from document files. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.
Both tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: list_folder_structure and read_document. The naming is predictable and easy to understand.
With only two tools, the server feels minimal and borderline thin for a file-analysis purpose. Each tool is useful, but the overall surface is small and may leave users wanting more capability.
The pair covers folder structure analysis and document content extraction, but common file types like plain text and CSV are not supported, and there are no file search or metadata retrieval operations. These are notable gaps for a file-analysis server.