Claude File Manager MCP

by sadd11

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

JavaScript

Local

Create a folder

create_directory

Creates a folder and any missing parent directories by default, so you can set up nested paths in one step.

Instructions

Creates a folder (including all missing parents by default).

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": "create_directory"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`path`	Yes	Folder path
`recursive`	No	Create all missing parent folders

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.3.0Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the recursive default ("including all missing parents by default"), but says nothing about the critical case of a path that already exists — whether that errors, is a no-op, or succeeds silently — nor about permission requirements or failure modes.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

A single sentence with the core action front-loaded and the non-obvious default attached as a qualifier. There is no filler or redundancy.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a two-parameter, non-destructive-in-appearance filesystem tool with no output schema, the definition covers the action and the recursion default but omits return value and already-exists behavior. It is adequate to start a call but not to predict the outcome.

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%, so both parameters are already fully documented with a default on `recursive`. The parenthetical merely restates that default in prose and adds no format, path-syntax, or interaction detail beyond the schema; baseline 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 and resource ("Creates a folder") plus a scope qualifier about parent creation, so the agent knows exactly what the tool produces. It does not name or contrast with any sibling, but among the listed siblings none is a competing create-folder operation, so ambiguity is low.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g., permissions or relative-vs-absolute paths), and no statement of when not to use it. Usage is only weakly implied by the verb, leaving the agent to infer everything from the operation name.

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