Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@qelos/better-mcp

@qelos/better-mcp

by qelos-io
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

fs__directory_tree

Retrieve a recursive JSON tree view of files and directories. Each entry includes name, type, and children for directories. Supports optional exclusion patterns.

Instructions

Get a recursive tree view of files and directories as a JSON structure. Each entry includes 'name', 'type' (file/directory), and 'children' for directories. Files have no children array, while directories always have a children array (which may be empty). The output is formatted with 2-space indentation for readability. Only works within allowed directories.

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": "fs__directory_tree"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes
excludePatternsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes output structure (name, type, children) and formatting (2-space indentation), and mentions directory restriction. However, lacks details on depth limits, symlink handling, or error behavior.

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?

Two sentences with clear structure: purpose first, then detail on children arrays and formatting. No redundant text.

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?

With no output schema and 0% parameter coverage, the description lacks essential details about parameter usage and limitations. It covers output structure but not enough for a file system tool.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%. Description does not mention parameters like 'path' (absolute vs relative?) or 'excludePatterns' (pattern syntax?). Adds no meaning beyond schema.

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?

The description clearly states 'Get a recursive tree view of files and directories as a JSON structure', specifying a verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like fs__list_directory (non-recursive) and fs__list_directory_with_sizes (includes sizes).

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 tool vs alternatives. The only context is 'Only works within allowed directories', but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

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