Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Proton Drive MCP

Proton Drive MCP

by googlarz
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Get item size

drive_size
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get the total size of a Proton Drive file or folder as reported by the CLI, so you can check storage usage. Read-only; requires CLI 0.9.0+.

Instructions

Get the size of one Proton Drive file or folder as reported by the CLI (filesystem size; folders are totalled by the CLI). Read-only. Needs Proton Drive CLI 0.9.0 or newer. For per-folder breakdowns use drive_tree.

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": "drive_size"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesAbsolute remote path, e.g. /my-files/Projects.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.9.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Adds real behavior beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations: figures come from the CLI's `filesystem size` and folders are totalled, and a minimum CLI version is required. It stops short of noting whether the size is on-disk bytes vs logical size or how large folder scans behave performance-wise.

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 tight sentence plus two short qualifiers, with purpose front-loaded and the alternative relegated to the end. Every clause carries information; nothing is redundant.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description supplies what the schema cannot: source of the value, folder-aggregation semantics, version prerequisite, and the correct sibling for finer granularity.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and includes an example path, so baseline is 3; the description earns a bump by clarifying that the path may name either a file or a folder, which the schema example alone doesn't make explicit.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get the size of one Proton Drive file or folder') and immediately scopes it as CLI-reported, which separates it from account-level siblings like drive_usage and from the recursive drive_tree. An agent can pick it without opening a schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly routes per-folder breakdown requests to drive_tree and states a version prerequisite for use. It does not contrast with drive_usage (whole-account totals), a sibling an agent could plausibly confuse with this one, so the guidance is clear but not fully exhaustive.

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