Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Proton Suite Agent

Proton Suite Agent

by Soluciones-Alexendros
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

List files on Proton Drive

proton_drive_list_files
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists files and folders in a specified Proton Drive directory using the proton-drive CLI, providing read-only access to cloud storage contents.

Instructions

Lists the contents of a remote Proton Drive path using the proton-drive CLI. Read-only.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "proton_drive_list_files"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
remote_pathNoRemote path on Proton Drive, e.g. /my-files/Documents./my-files
response_formatNomarkdown

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.8.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds minimal value beyond annotating 'Read-only'. It mentions the CLI tool used, which provides some implementation context, but does not disclose further behavioral traits.

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 with two sentences, front-loading the action and context. Every word is meaningful with no redundancy.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple read-only list operation with two optional parameters and strong annotations (readOnly, openWorld, idempotent), the description is adequate. However, it could mention whether the listing includes subfolders or metadata, which would improve completeness.

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?

The input schema has two parameters with 50% documentation coverage (only 'remote_path' has a description). The tool description does not explain parameters or their usage, leaving the agent to rely solely on the schema. No additional semantic information is provided.

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 tool lists contents of a remote Proton Drive path using the CLI. It is specific about the verb (list files) and resource (remote Proton Drive path), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'proton_list_folders' and 'proton_drive_copy'.

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 lacks context such as prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use it. Only the 'Read-only' hint is present, which does not constitute sufficient usage guidelines.

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