make_directoryCreate a directory and any missing parent folders in a single operation. Provide an absolute path to organize files or set up needed paths for Linux scripts and services.
Create a directory (mkdir -p, creates parent dirs as needed).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | Yes | Absolute path to create |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, establishing this as a non-destructive write. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context beyond that: 'mkdir -p' semantics mean parent directories are created as needed and an existing directory is not an error, which an agent needs to know. It does not cover failure/permission behavior, keeping it from a 5.
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?
A single, tightly-worded sentence with the core action front-loaded and the informative mkdir -p clarification parenthesized. Every clause earns its place with no waste.
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 one-parameter, no-output-schema tool this is nearly complete: it explains the action and the parent-directory creation behavior. It leaves error handling and permission requirements unstated, but those are minor for this operation.
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 coverage is 100%, so the single 'path' parameter is fully documented in the schema itself. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 appropriate.
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?
States a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('directory'), and the mkdir -p note clarifies the scope of what gets created. It does not explicitly name or contrast with siblings like list_directory or delete_file, but the purpose is unambiguous.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this versus alternatives (e.g., run_command with mkdir, or write_file). Usage is only implied by the plain meaning of 'create a directory'. No prerequisites or conditions are stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.