ShareWatch

Move File

move_file

DestructiveIdempotent

Move a file into a different folder. Both the file and destination folder must be accessible to ShareWatch.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`file_id`	Yes	The file to move
`folder_id`	Yes	The destination folder ID

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`moved`	Yes	true when Drive accepted the move
`file_id`	Yes
`file_name`	No	name of the file that moved — resolved from Drive, so it confirms WHICH file this was
`folder_id`	Yes	the folder it now lives in

Schema Changelog

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

First observedSep 5, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile with readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, and idempotentHint=true, so the description does not need to restate those. It adds the useful ShareWatch accessibility precondition, but it does not disclose side effects like whether the source location is removed or how name collisions are handled.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences convey the action, destination, and a key prerequisite without any filler or repetition of schema details. Every sentence earns its place.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple 2-parameter mutation with a full input schema, output schema, and annotations covering the side-effect profile, the description includes the essential precondition. It is complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly, though a sentence about source-folder behavior would make it fully comprehensive.

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?

The input schema already provides full descriptions for both parameters, file_id ('The file to move') and folder_id ('The destination folder ID'), so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds only high-level context and an access requirement, which does not materially change parameter interpretation.

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 states a specific verb ('Move'), the resource ('a file'), and the destination relationship ('into a different folder'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_file, upload_file, and create_folder without merely restating the name.

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 a clear usage context: moving a file between folders, with the precondition that both source and destination must be accessible to ShareWatch. It does not explicitly name alternatives or spell out when-not-to-use, but the context is sufficiently clear.

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?