ShareWatch

List Files

list_files

Read-onlyIdempotent

List the Google Workspace files ShareWatch can see. This is not the user's Drive — it is only what was created through ShareWatch plus what the user has explicitly shared with it, so a short list means a narrow grant and an empty one does not mean an empty Drive. Never tell the user a file does not exist on this basis; a file you cannot see here may still be there. Returns file IDs, names, types, URLs, and each file's parent folder — folders appear as entries too, so parent_folder_id is what tells you which files live inside which folder.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`files`	Yes
`guidance`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

First observedSep 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the read-only and idempotent annotations, the description discloses the scoping model, the open-world caveat, and the fact that folders appear as entries with parent_folder_id defining hierarchy. These are non-obvious behaviors an agent needs to interpret results correctly.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: scope, interpretation warning, and structural return details. The most important scoping information is front-loaded, and the description is dense but not bloated.

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?

With no parameters, a rich annotation set, an output schema, and a description that covers scope, interpretation, and folder behavior, nothing needed to invoke this tool correctly is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to add. The baseline for parameter-free tools applies here, and the description appropriately focuses on output interpretation instead.

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 opens with a specific verb and scope: 'List the Google Workspace files ShareWatch can see.' It immediately distinguishes this from a general Drive listing and makes clear that it is not showing everything the user owns.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives clear interpretation guidance: a short list means a narrow grant, an empty list does not mean an empty Drive, and absence here is not proof of absence. However, it does not explicitly name an alternative like search_files for cases where a broader search is needed.

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

All ShareWatch tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target a distinct resource and action, and the detailed descriptions separate similar-sounding ones. A few pairs could still be confused: access_file_by_url vs request_file_access, and create_document vs format_document, but their trigger conditions are described clearly enough to avoid frequent misselection.

Naming Consistency4/5

The set mostly follows a verb_noun pattern with consistent snake_case, e.g. create_document, update_spreadsheet, delete_file. Minor deviations like build_presentation instead of create_presentation, and format_document alongside create_document, break the pattern slightly but remain readable and predictable.

Tool Count3/5

25 tools is at the heavy end of the scale, though the domain spans Drive, Docs, Sheets, and Slides, which justifies a large surface. Some consolidation is possible — access_file_by_url and request_file_access overlap, as do create_document and format_document — so the count feels slightly bloated rather than tightly scoped.

Completeness4/5

The server covers the core file lifecycle well: create, read, update, delete, move, list, search, upload, and access control across all major Google Workspace document types. Minor gaps exist, such as no rename, copy, export, or direct sharing tool, but agents can work around these without major failures.

Resources

Need Help?