mcp-pcloud-crunchtools

Pcloud Read Text File

pcloud_read_text_file

Read-only

Read UTF-8 text files stored in pCloud by providing the file path, so MCP clients can retrieve file contents for analysis or processing.

Instructions

Read the contents of a UTF-8 text file stored in pCloud.

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": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "pcloud_read_text_file"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`path`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv2.5.0Sep 22, 2026
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
- removedOutput schema / description
```
Removed value: -"Generic wrapper for non-object return types."
```
First observedv2.1.0Sep 8, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe non-mutating read, so the description's main contribution is the UTF-8 constraint, which usefully implies binary files are out of scope. It says nothing about file-size limits, streaming, or failure behavior on missing/non-text paths.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and every word earns its place. No redundant restatement of the title.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the readOnly annotation covers safety for this simple single-parameter tool. The remaining gap is the path parameter's expected format and the handling of non-text or missing files.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is 0% for the single 'path' parameter, so the schema provides no semantics and the description only implies it is a pCloud file path. It does not state the path format (absolute vs relative, leading slash, folder prefix), so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb (read) and resource (UTF-8 text file in pCloud), which separates it from metadata siblings like pcloud_get_file_info and pcloud_get_checksum. It does not name an alternative explicitly, so it falls short of the 5 bar.

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?

The description gives no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and never references the sibling tools (e.g. that this returns contents while pcloud_get_file_info returns metadata). Usage is only implied by the verb 'read'.

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

Deploy Server