Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-synology

mcp-synology

by cmeans
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

create_folder

Idempotent

Creates one or more folders on a Synology NAS from full paths, optionally creating missing parent folders and treating existing folders as non-errors.

Instructions

Create one or more folders, each given as a full path starting with its shared folder (/video/TV Shows/New Show). By default (force_parent=true), missing folders above it are created too, and a folder that already exists is not an error.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathsYesFull paths of the folders to create (`["/video/TV Shows/New Show"]`).
force_parentNoCreate missing parent folders too (default true); with `false`, each parent must already exist.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.9.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / force_parent / description
      Added value: +"Create missing parent folders too (default true); with `false`, each parent must already exist."
    • addedInput schema / properties / paths / description
      Added value: +"Full paths of the folders to create (`[\"/video/TV Shows/New Show\"]`)."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "result": {
-      "title": "Result",
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "result"
-  ],
-  "title": "tool_create_folderOutput",
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. Addedv0.7.1

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already disclose non-read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context: paths must start from the shared folder root, missing parents are created by default, and existing folders are not an error (reinforcing idempotency). It does not cover permissions or return behavior, but adds meaningful traits beyond annotations.

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 tightly written sentences with zero waste. The path format constraint is front-loaded and the default behavior is explained immediately after.

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 two-parameter creation tool with full schema coverage and safety annotations, the description covers path format, parent creation, and idempotency. Return values are not described, but no output schema exists; the only minor gap is not stating permission requirements.

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 both parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description adds an example path and clarifies the default effect of force_parent, but largely mirrors what the schema already states.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create one or more folders') and immediately clarifies the input format with a full-path example. No sibling tool offers folder creation, and the scope (batch, shared-folder paths) is unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by the clear purpose and path requirement, but the description never says when to use this versus alternatives (e.g., relying on upload_file's implicit parent creation). It also provides no explicit when-not guidance.

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