laserfiche-mcp

laserfiche_folder_list

List immediate documents and subfolders in a Laserfiche repository folder to browse contents, with pagination and optional total child count.

Instructions

List the immediate children (documents and subfolders) of a folder.

For browse-style navigation from a known folder; the root is typically ID 1. Resolve a path string first with get_entry_by_path; to search the whole repository use a search tool instead.

Returns entries (each with web_url when web-client link templates are configured — see search_entries), total_count (null unless include_count=true was passed and the build supports $count) and next_link. On failure returns {"mode": "error", "error": <slug>, "folder_id": <int>} (not_found, auth_failed).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`skip`	No	0-indexed offset for pagination. Combine with max_results to walk a large folder in chunks; check next_link to know when to stop.
`folder_id`	Yes	Integer entry ID of the parent folder. The root folder is typically ID 1.
`max_results`	No	Page size (default 25, capped by LF_MAX_RESULTS_CEILING).
`include_count`	No	Ask the server to also compute total_count — the folder's full child count, not just this page's size. Costs an extra server-side count on top of the listing, so it's opt-in; without it, total_count is always null.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv2.5.0Oct 5, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / include_count

Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Ask the server to also compute total_count — the folder's full child count, not just this page's size. Costs an extra server-side count on top of the listing, so it's opt-in; without it, total_count is always null.",
+  "title": "Include Count",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

First observedv2.1.0Jun 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden, and it does well: it documents pagination via next_link, the conditional nature of total_count (null unless include_count=true and $count is supported), and the failure envelope with error slugs (not_found, auth_failed). It does not discuss permission requirements beyond the auth_failed slug, so it falls just short of a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loads the purpose, then groups navigation guidance, return shape, and the error envelope into tight paragraphs. Nearly every clause earns its place, though the return-value detail is somewhat redundant given an output schema exists.

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?

Given an output schema is present, explaining return fields is optional, yet the description supplies the extra behavioral facts an agent needs: pagination stop condition, conditional total_count, and the error envelope. Complete enough to invoke correctly without further docs.

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 description coverage is 100%, so skip, folder_id, max_results and include_count are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds only the build-dependent $count caveat for include_count, which is marginal added value above the baseline.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource plus scope: 'List the immediate children (documents and subfolders) of a folder.' The word 'immediate' precisely bounds depth and separates it from recursive search siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly frames this as browse-style navigation from a known folder, notes the root is typically ID 1, tells the agent to resolve a path with get_entry_by_path first, and routes repository-wide queries to a search tool instead. Textbook when/when-not/alternative guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.