Skip to main content
Glama

list_folders

List all folders in a workspace with their IDs and full paths so you can choose the right folderId before creating or updating a diagram.

Instructions

List every folder in the configured Space, ordered by name. Returns id and full path (e.g. 'Infra/AWS' for a nested folder). Use this BEFORE create_diagram or update_diagram when you want to place a diagram in a meaningful folder — agents should match by name (e.g. find a folder named 'Schemas' and pass its id as folderId). Folders are at most two levels deep. Creating folders is currently human-only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
spaceNoWhich workspace to act in: its id, its slug, or its exact name (case-insensitive). Omit to use this token's default workspace. Call list_spaces to see what this token can reach. A name that matches more than one workspace is refused — pass the id or slug instead.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.0.7
    • addedInput schema / properties / space
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Which workspace to act in: its id, its slug, or its exact name (case-insensitive). Omit to use this token's default workspace. Call list_spaces to see what this token can reach. A name that matches more than one workspace is refused — pass the id or slug instead.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  2. First observedv0.0.3

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose two real constraints: folders are at most two levels deep, and folder creation is human-only. It does not cover permission/auth requirements or behavior for spaces with zero folders, so it stops short of full disclosure.

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?

Three sentences, all load-bearing: scope/return shape, then the workflow instruction, then the two structural limits. The most actionable content (use before create/update) is front-loaded after the scope statement.

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?

For a simple one-param read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers scope, return fields, nesting depth, downstream usage, and the human-only limitation on creation. Nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.

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% for the single 'space' parameter, and the schema description already explains id/slug/name resolution and the ambiguity refusal. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond the phrase 'configured Space', so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('List every folder in the configured Space') plus the ordering and the returned fields (id and full path with a concrete example). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like list_spaces and list_diagrams.

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?

Explicitly names the downstream tools (create_diagram, update_diagram), the precondition ('use this BEFORE'), and the intended workflow (match a folder by name and pass its id as folderId). This is a model example of routing guidance.

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