uploadFile
Uploads an image. - Upload image of the pet.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| petId | Yes | ||
| uploadFileBody | No | ||
| x-hapi-auth-state | No | ||
| additionalMetadata | No |
Petstore MCP Server
by ai.com.mcp
TDQS
C2.4/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility. It only states the action 'uploads an image' without disclosing behavioral details such as authentication requirements, file format expectations, side effects on the pet record, or response structure.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness3/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is short but redundant: 'Uploads an image.' and 'Upload image of the pet.' convey nearly the same information. While not verbose, the second sentence adds little value, resulting in a slightly inefficient structure.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness2/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a tool with 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It fails to explain parameter usage, authentication context, or what happens after upload, leaving significant gaps for an agent.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no meaning for any of the 4 parameters (petId, uploadFileBody, x-hapi-auth-state, additionalMetadata). The description's mention of 'image' and 'pet' does not map to specific parameter roles.
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 clearly states the tool uploads an image for a pet, using the verb 'upload' and resource 'image'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like addPet or updatePet by explicitly mentioning image upload, though the phrasing is somewhat redundant.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like updatePetWithForm or addPet. The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
C2.8/5.0
Disambiguation4/5
Most tools target distinct resources and actions, but updatePet and updatePetWithForm overlap in purpose (both update a pet), creating minor ambiguity. Other pairs like createUser and createUsersWithListInput are clearly different.
Naming Consistency3/5
The naming mixes verbs (addPet vs createUser, findPetsByStatus vs getPetById) and styles, but each resource area follows a somewhat predictable pattern (get* for reads, update* for updates, delete* for deletes). Not chaotic, but inconsistent.
Tool Count4/5
19 tools is on the heavier side but reasonable for a petstore server covering pets, orders, and users. Each tool serves a distinct need, and the count reflects the multi-domain scope.
Completeness5/5
The tool surface covers the full lifecycle for pets, orders, and users, including create, read, update, delete, and search operations. Additional operations like login, logout, and inventory are present. No obvious gaps for the expected domain.