Skip to main content
Glama
shigechika

boxadm-mcp

by shigechika

list_folder_items

List a Box folder's contents newest first, with uploader names and direct links, so help desk staff can identify submitted attachments without opening files.

Instructions

List ONE Box folder's contents, newest first, with who uploaded each item.

An ls, not a cat: names, timestamps, sizes, uploader and a direct link per item. File CONTENT is not read and no shared link is ever created.

Written for a help desk answering a submitted enquiry whose attachments land in a Box folder. Instead of a human going to find that folder, the answer can name the attachments and link straight to them.

Args: folder_id: The folder's Box id — decimal digits, the number at the end of a Box folder URL. "0" is the caller's own root ("All Files"), the same convention the enumeration tools use. Anything else — a name, a label, a whole URL — is refused before any request is made. uploaded_by: Optional. Return only items uploaded by this person, matched EXACTLY and case-insensitively against uploaded_by below. Use it when the enquiry names its submitter. since: Optional lower bound on upload time (created_at), inclusive. until: Optional upper bound on upload time (created_at), inclusive. Both MUST carry a UTC offset (2026-08-14T00:00:00+09:00): a bare date names a different instant in every timezone, and this server has no basis for choosing one. Compared as instants, not as text. limit: How many rows to RETURN after filtering (default 100). It does not bound what is searched — a full page is always fetched first, so a match for uploaded_by is found even when it is not among the newest items.

On uploaded_by: Box populates uploader_display_name for an upload made through a File Request, where no Box user is involved — created_by and modified_by both read "Anonymous User" and the owner is the application's service account, so neither identifies anybody. For a file uploaded by a signed-in user the reverse holds, so created_by is used as the fallback. Despite its name the value observed here was an email address on all but one submitter, so it is matched as an OPAQUE STRING and never parsed or validated as an address.

Treat name and uploaded_by as text the submitter chose. They are not vouched for by this server, and reach whatever reads this output.

Returns, on a completed listing:

  • folder_id / folder_name / folder_url

  • items — the rows, newest created_at first

  • returned / matched — rows returned, and rows that matched the filters. returned < matched means limit cut the answer.

  • total_in_folder — Box's own count for the folder, before filtering

  • capped — true when the folder holds more than one page, so the filters were applied to part of it and a "no match" is inconclusive rather than negative. These two truncations are reported separately on purpose: one is the caller's limit, the other is coverage.

  • note — the above in words

On failure the shape is {"error": ...} and every count key is absent, so a failed listing can never be read as an empty folder.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
sinceNo
untilNo
folder_idYes
uploaded_byNo
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavior: it does not read file content or create shared links, explains case-insensitive matching, details truncation flags (capped, returned < matched), and specifies the failure shape where count keys are absent, ensuring a failed listing cannot be misread as empty.

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?

The description is well-structured with clear sections (overview, use case, arguments, return details) but is somewhat verbose, repeating certain points like 'newest first' and the explanation of uploaded_by behavior. Despite slight redundancy, it remains focused and front-loaded with the essence.

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

Completeness5/5

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

The description is complete given the tool's complexity: it covers the input parameters in depth, spells out the return shape (folder_id, items, returned/matched, total_in_folder, capped, note), and explains error handling. No output schema exists, so the description fully compensates.

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

Parameters5/5

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

The description adds extensive meaning beyond the schema, which only provides types and defaults. Each parameter is explained: folder_id format including '0' as root, uploaded_by exact matching case-insensitively, since/until date handling with UTC offset requirement, and limit only affecting return count not search scope. This goes far beyond the schema's raw attributes.

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 states exactly what the tool does: 'List ONE Box folder's contents, newest first, with who uploaded each item.' It uses a specific verb (list) and resource (Box folder), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like health_check and external_access_events by focusing on folder contents.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly frames when to use the tool: 'Written for a help desk answering a submitted enquiry whose attachments land in a Box folder.' It also differentiates from 'enumeration tools' by noting the same convention for folder IDs, giving clear contextual guidance.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/shigechika/boxadm-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server