Una implementación de servidor de Protocolo de Contexto de Modelo (MCP) que proporciona operaciones del sistema de archivos a través de una interfaz estandarizada.
El servidor de archivos MCP permite que los modelos de IA realicen operaciones con archivos en el sistema de archivos local mediante una API estandarizada. Está desarrollado con el SDK del Protocolo de Contexto de Modelo y proporciona herramientas para leer, crear y listar archivos.
Related MCP server: filesystem-mcp-server
Crear archivos : crea nuevos archivos con contenido específico
Leer archivos : lee el contenido de los archivos existentes
Lista de contenidos del directorio : lista de archivos y directorios con información detallada
Monitoreo del rendimiento : Integración de Sentry incorporada para seguimiento de errores y monitoreo del rendimiento
npm installInicie el servidor de archivos MCP:
node src/index.jsEl servidor se comunica a través de stdin/stdout utilizando el protocolo MCP.
Crea un nuevo archivo en la ruta especificada con el contenido proporcionado.
Parámetros:
filePath : Ruta donde se debe crear el archivo
content : Contenido a escribir en el archivo
Devoluciones:
Mensaje de éxito con información sobre la ruta y el tamaño del archivo
Lee el contenido de un archivo en la ruta especificada.
Parámetros:
filePath : Ruta al archivo a leer
Devoluciones:
El contenido del archivo
Enumera archivos y directorios en la ruta especificada.
Parámetros:
path : Ruta del directorio desde donde se listan los contenidos
Devoluciones:
Una tabla de rebajas que contiene nombres de archivos, tamaños y tipos
SENTRY_DSN : Nombre de la fuente de datos de Sentry para seguimiento de errores (opcional)
@modelcontextprotocol/sdk : El paquete SDK de MCP
zod : Validación de esquema
@sentry/node : Seguimiento de errores y monitorización del rendimiento
Ejemplos de cómo llamar a estas herramientas a través del protocolo MCP:
{
"name": "createfile",
"params": {
"filePath": "example/test.txt",
"content": "Hello, world!"
}
}{
"name": "readfile",
"params": {
"filePath": "example/test.txt"
}
}{
"name": "listfiles",
"params": {
"path": "example"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| content | Yes | Content to write to the file | |
| filePath | Yes | Path where the file should be created |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| filePath | Yes | Path to the file to read |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0createfilelistfilesreadfileScored across 3 tools
The three tools have clearly distinct purposes: createfile for creating files, listfiles for listing files, and readfile for reading files. There is no overlap or ambiguity between these operations, making it easy for an agent to select the right tool for each task.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (createfile, listfiles, readfile) with no deviations. The naming is uniform and predictable, using lowercase letters and clear action-object combinations throughout.
With only three tools, the server feels thin for a file management domain, as it lacks essential operations like update, delete, or write to files. While the count is minimal, it covers basic CRUD aspects but leaves notable gaps in functionality.
The tool set is significantly incomplete for file management, missing critical operations such as updatefile, deletefile, and writefile. This creates dead ends for agents trying to perform common file workflows, leading to potential failures in tasks requiring modification or deletion.
Securely search and manage workspace context files for AI agents and teams.
A comprehensive Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that enables AI assistants to interact with yo…
A Model Context Protocol server for Wix AI tools
Browse and manage files in your Moxt AI workspace from any MCP client.
