Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ragflow-kb-mcp

ragflow-kb-mcp

by feci
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

ragflow_get_parent_folder

Read-only

Retrieve the direct parent folder of a file or folder in RAGFlow using its ID, so agents can navigate and organize knowledge base content.

Instructions

Get the folder that directly contains a file or folder.

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": {
      "file_id": "<file_id>"
    },
    "name": "ragflow_get_parent_folder"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
file_idYesFile or folder ID in the RAGFlow file manager

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.1

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile needs no restating. The description's only added behavioral nuance is 'directly', which signals single-level resolution rather than a full traversal; it says nothing about failure behavior when the item has no parent or does not exist.

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?

A single short sentence with the key qualifier ('directly') front-loaded and zero filler. Nothing could be removed without losing meaning.

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 and annotations cover safety, so return values and mutability need not be explained. However, for a tool whose only real selection risk is confusion with ragflow_get_file_ancestors and ragflow_list_files, the description leaves that routing entirely unaddressed.

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 coverage is 100% and the file_id property already documents that it accepts 'File or folder ID in the RAGFlow file manager'. The description adds nothing about the parameter, which is acceptable at baseline when the schema does the work.

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 and resource ('Get the folder that directly contains...') and qualifies the scope with 'directly', which separates the immediate parent from the full ancestor chain. It is not explicitly differentiated from the sibling ragflow_get_file_ancestors, but the resource 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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative. An agent must infer from the word 'directly' that this returns one level up rather than the full chain, so usage is only implied.

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