OmniCommanderMCP

by kaannsaydamm

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Local

move_path

Move or rename a file or directory by specifying the source and destination paths.

Instructions

Move or rename a file/directory.

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": {
      "from": "<from>",
      "to": "<to>"
    },
    "name": "move_path"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`to`	Yes
`from`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 10, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as atomicity, overwrite behavior, permissions required, or error handling. This is a significant gap for a destructive file operation.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is a single sentence, making it concise but lacking structure. It could benefit from being slightly expanded without losing efficiency, to include more context.

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 the tool has no output schema and two critical parameters, the description is too brief. It should explain return values, error states, and the effect on the source path after the operation.

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 description coverage is 0%, yet the description adds no meaning to the parameters 'from' and 'to'. It does not explain expected formats (e.g., absolute paths) or that 'to' can be a new name for renaming in the same directory.

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 it moves or renames a file/directory, distinguishing it from siblings like copy_file and delete_path. However, it could be more explicit about the relationship between moving and renaming.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternative operations (e.g., copy vs move, or delete). The description lacks context about prerequisites or when this tool should be preferred.

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