Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Penpot MCP Server

Penpot MCP Server

by zcube
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_team_shared_files

Retrieve all files shared with a specific Penpot team using its team ID. Provides a list of shared files for design management and integration.

Instructions

Get all files shared with a team

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": {
      "teamId": "<teamId>"
    },
    "name": "get_team_shared_files"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
teamIdYesTeam ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a safe read operation but does not explain essential details such as whether the result is sorted, paginated, or limited to directly shared files. This is a significant transparency gap for a tool with no structured annotations.

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?

The description is a single, clear sentence with no fluff or redundancy. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool and front-loads the essential action.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's low complexity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks any context about return format, pagination, or edge cases, and the presence of a sibling tool with similar scope (get_team_recent_files) introduces ambiguity that the description does not resolve.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the single parameter teamId is documented with 'Team ID'. The description adds no further semantic meaning beyond the schema, so it relies on the baseline 3 score. No compensation is needed since coverage is high.

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?

The description 'Get all files shared with a team' clearly identifies the operation (getting files) and the specific scope (shared with a team). It distinguishes from the broader list_files tool, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with the sibling get_team_recent_files.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_team_recent_files or list_files. It merely states what it does, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage from the name and context.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools