vibedeploy

Rehost a site's external images locally

rehost_images

DestructiveIdempotent

Download the external images a site references (e.g. from the old site it was rebuilt from), store them on this VibeDeploy site under assets/img/, and rewrite the HTML references to local paths so the site no longer depends on the original. Call this once AFTER deploying a site rebuilt with the Website Converter. Auto-detects the external image URLs from the site's own HTML; downloads are SSRF-guarded, size/count/time capped, and applied atomically (patch mode). Images already hosted on vibedeploy.be are skipped.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	Site name (subdomain) whose external images should be downloaded and rehosted locally.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes
`siteId`	Yes
`failures`	Yes	External image URLs that could not be rehosted (left untouched in the HTML).
`bytesHosted`	Yes
`imagesHosted`	Yes	Number of external images downloaded and stored on the site.
`htmlFilesUpdated`	Yes	Number of HTML files whose img references were rewritten to local paths.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 6, 2026

removedOutput schema / properties / request_id

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Server-assigned request correlation id. Quote it when contacting support.",
-  "type": "string"
-}

Changed1 schema field changedJul 20, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / request_id

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Server-assigned request correlation id. Quote it when contacting support.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedJun 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses important behaviors beyond the annotations: auto-detection of URLs from HTML, SSRF-guarded downloads, size/count/time caps, atomic patch application, and skipping vibedeploy.be images. These details meaningfully inform the agent about side effects and safety constraints that annotations alone do not convey.

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 dense but every sentence earns its place: the core operation comes first, followed by usage timing, safety limits, and implementation details. It is front-loaded and structured without redundant phrasing.

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?

For a tool with one parameter, an output schema, and rich annotations, the description covers all essential context: what it does, when to call it, what safety mechanisms apply, and what artifact is modified. There are no missing prerequisites or ambiguous aspects that would prevent an agent from invoking it correctly.

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 schema already fully documents the single parameter with 100% coverage, establishing that 'name' is the site subdomain. The description reinforces the purpose ('whose external images should be downloaded and rehosted locally') but adds little beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema carries the semantic weight.

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 action ('Download... store... rewrite'), names the exact resource (external images referenced by a site's HTML), and explains the outcome (removing the original dependency). It is clearly distinguishable from all sibling tools, none of which perform image rehosting.

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?

It explicitly states when to call the tool: 'Call this once AFTER deploying a site rebuilt with the Website Converter.' This gives the agent a clear precondition and frequency, which is sufficient guidance for a tool with no ambiguous alternative among siblings.

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

All vibedeploy tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.