Skip to main content
Glama

TeamShared

by io.github.xhad

File List

file_list

List active shared files in the caller's org, newest update first.

Each file includes public_url (the /s/{slug} link, or /s/{share_token} if no slug) when published, plus slug and share_token. Use query to find a file by title without listing everything — e.g. file_list(query="yield vault"). Pass work_id to list files on a task (agent log + artifacts), or project_id to list files on a project (artifacts only). project_id wins if both filters are set. Archived files stay joined but are omitted.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
queryNoOptional case-insensitive title substring to filter by, e.g. 'yield vault'
work_idNoOnly files attached to this work item UUID
project_idNoOnly files attached to this project UUID

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / project_id
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Only files attached to this project UUID"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / work_id
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Only files attached to this work item UUID"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the burden. It discloses useful behavioral traits: active files only, newest-update ordering, archived files stay joined but are omitted, and the public_url formation for published files. It doesn't describe pagination or full return shape, but with no annotations and an output schema present, this is a solid disclosure.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is compact and front-loaded with the core behavior, followed by return-URL details and filter guidance. Every sentence earns its place, though the public_url/slug/share_token detail could arguably be deferred to the output schema; it is still concise and relevant.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (4 optional params) and no annotations, the description covers primary use cases, filter semantics, precedence, and a key behavioral nuance (archived files). It doesn't mention pagination or limit defaults, but the output schema and self-explanatory limit parameter reduce the need.

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?

Schema coverage is 75% and the description adds meaning beyond the schema: it explains the purpose of query (find by title without full listing), explains work_id vs project_id semantics (task vs project, artifacts only vs agent log + artifacts), and documents precedence. The limit parameter is left to the schema but its constraints are self-explanatory.

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 ('List'), resource ('active shared files in the caller's org'), and ordering ('newest update first'). It distinguishes itself from sibling file tools by focusing on listing/filtering rather than create/get/update, and the description explicitly covers filter semantics that set it apart from file_get.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: use query to find a file by title without listing everything, pass work_id to list files on a task, project_id to list files on a project. It also documents precedence (project_id wins) and clarifies that archived files are omitted, giving clear context for choosing parameters and interpreting results.

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

All TeamShared toolsInspect
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

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

With 104 tools across many domains (memory, work, projects, files, agents, context, strategic, ontology), the use of clear prefixes (memory_, work_, project_, file_, agent_run_, context_) makes most tools distinct. However, there are some potential confusions between memory_session_* vs memory_state_*, and memory_recall vs memory_think vs memory_assemble_context, though descriptions clarify their specific purposes. Aliases like memory_playbook_get for memory_procedure_get are explicit and reduce ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

Tool names follow a highly consistent pattern: prefix_domain_action (e.g., file_create, work_update, memory_recall, agent_run_start). All use snake_case, with verbs consistently placed after the domain prefix. Even less common tools like account_brief and attention_snapshot fit the overall naming scheme, making the set predictable and easy to navigate.

Tool Count3/5

At 104 tools, this is an exceptionally large surface area, far exceeding the 25+ threshold that feels heavy. However, the server covers an extensive domain (organizational memory, work management, project tracking, file sharing, agent orchestration, and strategic planning), which justifies a large count. Still, the sheer number may overwhelm agents, and some tools could be consolidated (e.g., many memory_session_* and memory_state_* variants).

Completeness4/5

The tool surface is remarkably complete for its stated purpose, covering CRUD operations for files, work items, projects, and memory, plus lifecycle management for agents, sessions, and strategic plans. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no direct memory_item_get by ID, no section removal in projects), but agents can work around these using existing tools like memory_recall or work_create with parent_id. Overall, the set minimizes dead ends.

Resources