markdown-vault-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

list_folders

List subfolders in a markdown vault, optionally within a parent folder. Skips hidden and empty directories, returning relative paths.

Instructions

List subfolders in the vault, optionally scoped to a parent folder.

Skips hidden directories and empty folders.

Args: folder: Parent folder to list subfolders from (relative to vault root). If empty, lists top-level vault folders.

Returns: Newline-separated list of folder paths relative to vault root.

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": "list_folders"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`folder`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.1Sep 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations available, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It explicitly states that hidden directories and empty folders are skipped, and that the return value is a newline-separated list of folder paths relative to the vault root. This provides useful behavior beyond the bare schema.

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 compact and well-structured with a one-line summary, behavioral notes, Args, and Returns. Every sentence adds useful information with no redundancy.

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?

For a simple list operation with one optional parameter, the description covers purpose, parameter semantics, filtering behavior, and return format. Nothing important is missing for an agent to call it correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description fully documents the only parameter: 'folder' is a parent folder relative to vault root, and an empty value means top-level folders. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List subfolders in the vault.' It also clarifies optional scoping to a parent folder, making the tool's purpose unambiguous and distinguishing it from note- or task-oriented sibling tools.

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?

The description gives clear usage context: when 'folder' is empty, it lists top-level vault folders, implying when you would want a broader or narrower listing. No explicit alternative is named, but no direct folder-listing sibling exists, so this is acceptable.

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