Mask all files in a directory using a swap session to protect sensitive data before sharing. Provide session name and directory path to apply masking.
Mask all files in a directory using a swap session.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| directory_path | Yes | ||
| file_extensions | No | ||
| session_name_or_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it does not. It does not mention whether masking modifies files in place, whether it is reversible, what happens to subdirectories, or whether any session state is consumed or changed.
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?
The description is one short sentence with no filler and front-loads the main action. It is concise, though it sacrifices useful detail for brevity.
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?
For a tool with 3 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no annotations, the description is far too thin. It omits the role of file_extensions, behavior on nested directories, session requirements, and side effects. The presence of an output schema does not compensate for these missing operational details.
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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for missing parameter meaning. It only indirectly references session_name_or_id and directory_path, and says nothing about file_extensions, which is a meaningful optional parameter with no schema documentation.
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?
The description states a specific action ('Mask all files in a directory') and the mechanism ('using a swap session'). It clearly differentiates from siblings like phantomswap_mask_text and phantomswap_unmask_directory by specifying directory-level masking.
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?
The description implies when to use this tool: when masking all files in a directory rather than a single text value. However, it provides no explicit guidance about prerequisites such as needing an existing swap session, nor exclusions versus alternative tools like mask_text or unmask_directory.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.