ADLS2 MCP Server

set_file_metadata

Set a metadata key-value pair on a file in Azure Data Lake Storage Gen2. Specify filesystem, file path, key, and value.

Instructions

Set a single metadata key-value pair for a file

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": {
      "filesystem": "<filesystem>",
      "file_path": "<file_path>",
      "key": "<key>",
      "value": "<value>"
    },
    "name": "set_file_metadata"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`filesystem`	Yes
`file_path`	Yes
`key`	Yes
`value`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.4Jun 4, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

The description indicates mutation ('set') but does not disclose side effects, such as whether existing keys are overwritten, or if the file must exist. With no annotations, the description fails to provide adequate behavioral context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single short sentence, which is concise and front-loaded. However, it sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given 4 required parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and sibling tools with similar names, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on return values, error conditions, and when to use this versus 'set_file_metadata_json'.

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%, so the description must explain parameters, but it only mentions 'key-value pair' without elaborating on the four required parameters (filesystem, file_path, key, value). No details on value format, constraints, or expected types.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'set' and resource 'single metadata key-value pair for a file'. It distinguishes from sibling 'set_file_metadata_json' by implying this tool handles individual key-value pairs rather than JSON.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'set_file_metadata_json'. No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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

Deploy Server