List files and folders in an iCloud Drive directory, showing path, name, type, size, and modified date for each entry. Defaults to the root folder.
List a Drive folder (default: root). Each entry has path, name, type, size, modified, local.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'List' implies a read operation, but nothing is said about whether listing recurses into subfolders, whether results are paginated, or whether hidden/trashed items are included — meaningful gaps for an agent enumerating a folder.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two compact sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope. The second sentence enumerates return fields, which is mildly redundant given an output schema exists, but it costs little and reads cleanly.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The output schema covers return values, so the entry-field listing is a bonus rather than a necessity. However, with zero annotations and a bare parameter, the definition still omits recursion, pagination, and permission context, leaving it only minimally sufficient.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 0% and the single 'path' property has an opaque empty-string default. The description usefully clarifies that an omitted path means root, which the schema does not convey, but adds no format, separator, or escaping detail for the path value itself.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb (List) and resource (a Drive folder), and pins the default scope to root. It does not distinguish itself from the closely related icloud_search or icloud_list_trash siblings, but the core purpose is unambiguous.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to list versus when to use icloud_search, icloud_info, or icloud_list_trash. The default-to-root note is the only contextual hint, leaving the agent to infer selection criteria from sibling names alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.