Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mesa-clm

mesa-clm

by idss-mesa
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

ds_move_file

Move or rename a file or directory to a new location by specifying the existing path and the destination path, which must not already exist.

Instructions

Move a file (data-object) or directory (collection) to a new location.

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": {
      "old_path": "<old_path>",
      "new_path": "<new_path>"
    },
    "name": "ds_move_file"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
new_pathYesThe new, complete path to move the file (data-object) or directory (collection) to, including its new name. The path must not already exist.
old_pathYesThe old path to the file (data-object) or directory (collection).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It never states that the source path is removed (destructive implication), what permissions are required, whether the operation is atomic, or how conflicts at the destination are handled — all critical for a mutation tool.

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?

A single tight sentence with the verb front-loaded and no filler. It is appropriately sized, though its brevity is partly the source of the behavioral gaps.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should at minimum note that the source is removed and that the destination must not exist. It omits both, leaving the agent without the destructive semantics it needs.

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 description coverage is 100%, with both old_path and new_path fully documented, including that new_path must not already exist. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 (move) and both resource types (file/data-object, directory/collection), which is clear enough for an agent to act on. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling ds_copy_file, so it stops short of a 5.

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 on when to use this versus ds_copy_file or ds_upload_file, no prerequisites, and no mention of what happens when the destination already exists beyond the schema note. The agent must infer usage entirely.

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