Write or overwrite a text file at a specified relative path in the managed directory, accepting plain text content.
Grava ou sobrescreve um arquivo de texto no diretório gerenciado.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| content | Yes | Conteúdo em texto simples a ser gravado | |
| relativePath | Yes | Caminho relativo do arquivo |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description mentions the overwrite behavior, which adds some transparency. However, without annotations, it fails to disclose potential failure modes, file size limits, or whether it handles non-text content.
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?
Single sentence, concise and front-loaded. Every word is necessary and efficiently communicates the core function.
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?
Adequate for a simple two-parameter tool with no output schema. Could be improved by specifying file size limits, encoding, or potential error conditions.
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?
Schema coverage is 100%, so the description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema. It provides context (text file, managed directory) but no further details on parameters.
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?
The description clearly states the action (saves/overwrites), resource (text file), and location (managed directory). It effectively differentiates from siblings like delete_file or list_files.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_directory or move_file. It does not indicate that it is for text files only or that it overwrites existing files.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.