Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AIMFP

AIMFP

by aryanduntley
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

add_file_to_module

Assign a file to a module by creating a junction entry. Specify file ID and module ID to link them.

Instructions

Assign a file to a module. Creates module_files junction entry. Same pattern as add_file_to_flow.

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": {
      "file_id": "<file_id>",
      "module_id": "<module_id>"
    },
    "name": "add_file_to_module"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
file_idYesFile ID to assign
module_idYesModule ID to assign to

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.37.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) indicate mutation but non-destructive. Description adds that it creates a junction entry and follows the same pattern as add_file_to_flow. However, does not describe side effects, error conditions, or behavior if file already assigned to module.

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?

Two short sentences with no unnecessary words. Front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence is meaningful.

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 junction creation tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is adequate. It explains the purpose and pattern. Could hint at return value or idempotency, but not critical.

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% with clear descriptions for both parameters ('File ID to assign', 'Module ID to assign to'). Description does not add further meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states the tool assigns a file to a module and creates a module_files junction entry. It mentions the same pattern as add_file_to_flow, which helps distinguish it from siblings like add_files_to_module or remove_file_from_module.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like add_files_to_module (bulk) or remove_file_from_module. Also no mention of prerequisites or constraints.

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