Claude File Manager MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Extract a ZIP archive

unzip_path

Extract ZIP archives into a destination folder, creating missing parent directories and preventing path traversal. Existing files are kept unless overwrite is enabled.

Instructions

Extracts a ZIP archive into a folder, creating missing parent folders. Stored and deflated entries with UTF-8 names are supported (ZIP64 and encrypted archives are not). Paths that would escape the destination are rejected. By default nothing is overwritten.

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": {
      "source": "<source>",
      "destination": "<destination>"
    },
    "name": "unzip_path"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`source`	Yes	Archive path
`overwrite`	No	Replace files that already exist (no backup is made)
`destination`	Yes	Folder to extract into

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.3.0Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses supported compression methods (stored, deflated), supported filename encoding (UTF-8), unsupported variants (ZIP64, encrypted archives), zip-slip path rejection, and the non-destructive default. It stops short of describing failure/partial-extraction behavior or whether an existing non-empty destination is merged.

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?

Four short sentences, each earning its place: purpose first, then format support limits, then safety constraints, then the default write policy. No filler and no redundancy with the title.

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 three-parameter mutation-on-disk tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers format support, safety limits, and default overwrite policy adequately. The only material gap is what the call returns (count or list of extracted files) and error behavior, which nothing else in the definition supplies.

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 all three parameters are already documented in the schema, including the 'no backup is made' note on overwrite — the description adds only the parent-folder-creation behavior, which relates to destination. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 — 'Extracts a ZIP archive into a folder' — with the scope constraint that parent folders are created. It never names a sibling (e.g., an archive-creation tool) so differentiation is left implicit, but the wording is unambiguous on its own.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied: 'By default nothing is overwritten' tells the agent the default behavior and the overwrite parameter implicitly changes it, but there is no explicit when-to-use / when-not-to-use guidance or routing to an alternative tool.

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