Claude File Manager MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

List a folder

list_directory

List files and folders with optional recursive traversal, depth limits, and hidden-file visibility so you can inspect directory contents within the configured root.

Instructions

Lists files and folders. Paths can be relative to the server's root folder. Supports recursive traversal.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_directory"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`path`	No	Folder path (defaults to root)	.
`max_depth`	No	Traversal depth when recursive=true
`recursive`	No	Traverse nested folders
`show_hidden`	No	Show hidden files (names starting with a dot)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.3.0Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only listing but never states permissions needed, whether symlinks or unreadable entries are skipped, whether results are truncated or paginated, or what the response shape looks like — significant gaps for a filesystem tool.

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?

Three short sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and no filler. The recursion sentence mildly duplicates the 'recursive' parameter description, but the text is otherwise tight.

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 zero-required-parameter read tool with full schema coverage this covers the basics, but it omits result format (names only? metadata? nested structure for recursion) and gives no routing guidance among the many listing/search siblings, which matters given how crowded the sibling set is.

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 every parameter (path, max_depth, recursive, show_hidden) is already documented in the schema, making 3 the baseline. The description restates path relativity and recursion but adds no new meaning such as how max_depth interacts with the root default or how hidden files are treated on other platforms.

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 ("Lists files and folders") and adds that recursive traversal is supported. However, it does not distinguish this tool from plausible siblings such as list_tree or find_files, so the agent must infer which listing tool to pick.

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 and no named alternative. The only scoping statement ("Paths can be relative to the server's root folder") is about path resolution rather than about choosing this tool over a tree or search tool.

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