Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Archiware MCP

Archiware MCP

by mnott
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

restore_archive

Restore a single file or folder from a P5 archive index to an alternate directory; preview the selection and confirm with a planId before submitting the restore job.

Instructions

Restores ONE entry (file, or folder with everything below) of a P5 ARCHIVE index to an alternate directory: RestoreSelection create , addentry , submit; returns the job id. Without confirm only the preview (read-back of the selection: entries and bytes from P5, free space, conflicts, policy, planId; the probe selection is destroyed, nothing submitted). confirm:true must pass that planId.

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": "restore_archive"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNoAbsolute directory in the P5 container; the original path is placed below it
pathYesAbsolute path of the entry as archived
indexNoArchive index (default Default-Archive)
planIdNoplanId printed by the preview; required with confirm:true. A changed destination or new conflicts make the call refuse and show the new plan
confirmNoMust be true to actually run (with planId)
forceSyncNoAllow to:'original' inside a configured syncRoot
onConflictNoWhat to do when a destination file exists: refuse (default), rename (<name>.restored-YYYYMMDD; not for P5 volume restores) or overwrite

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does substantial work: it discloses that the preview destroys the probe selection and submits nothing, that a job id is returned, and what the preview returns (entries, bytes, free space, conflicts, policy, planId). Remaining gaps are permissions and whether an actual restore can overwrite without onConflict being set explicitly, but the critical non-obvious traits are disclosed.

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 purpose is front-loaded, which is good, but the mid-section embeds raw command syntax ('RestoreSelection create <client> <dir>, addentry <archive handle>, submit') that is hard to parse and of questionable value to a calling agent. The colon-spliced clauses packing preview contents into one sentence hurt readability.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a 7-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it explains both phases, what the preview yields, that the actual run returns a job id, and the guardrails on confirm. What it omits is minor by comparison, chiefly required permissions and a pointer to the downstream job tool.

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%, so the schema already explains path, to, index, planId, confirm, forceSync, and the onConflict enum. The description reinforces the confirm/planId coupling and the refusal-on-changed-destination rule, but this largely restates what the planId schema text already says, adding little net meaning beyond format and flow syntax.

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 plus scope: 'Restores ONE entry (file, or folder with everything below) of a P5 ARCHIVE index to an alternate directory.' The emphasis on ONE entry and 'alternate directory' implicitly scopes it against the sibling restore_* family, but no sibling is named, so an agent must infer the boundary with restore, restore_version, restore_volume, and catalog_restore.

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?

The two-phase protocol is spelled out clearly: omit confirm for a preview, then pass confirm:true with the planId from that preview. It also states that a changed destination or new conflicts cause a refusal, which tells the agent what to do on retry. It gives no guidance on choosing this tool over the similarly named restore siblings, which is the main gap.

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