Conecto

Get an upload link

files_upload_link

A one-time link for one file of up to 25 MB, working for an hour. Give page_url to a person who has their own document (a contract to sign, a scan, a form), the person you chat with included: they open it, pick or drop the file, and it is stored under their file name. From code that reaches api.conecto.chat, PUT the raw file to upload_url, e.g. curl -T report.pdf "<upload_url>", which replies with the file and its download link. A sandbox that can't reach it (claude.ai's can't) hands page_url to the person; never type a file out as base64. A document you write needs no upload: documents_create_pdf makes it. Free to ask for; the upload costs $0.001 when it arrives. files.added tells you it arrived, with its text once read, and files_get with file_id finds it. A key that only reads or drafts gets the links as "[redacted]". Free.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "files_upload_link"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes
`content_type`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 28, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only say this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent call. The description adds the traits that actually matter: one-time use, one-hour expiry, 25 MB cap, $0.001 charged on arrival, files.added event firing on delivery, and link redaction for read-only keys — none of which are derivable from structured fields.

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?

Dense and mostly front-loaded, but it drifts across four unrelated concerns (person handoff, code path, sandbox fallback, billing/events) in run-on sentences. The trailing 'Free.' directly undercuts 'the upload costs $0.001 when it arrives', so the ending contradicts the pricing stated two sentences earlier.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description correctly compensates by naming the returns (page_url, upload_url) and what a PUT to upload_url yields. The only real gap is that it consumes parameters it never defines, so an agent can call the endpoint but not confidently fill in name/content_type.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is 0% and the description never explains the two parameters: `name` (max 200 chars) is only obliquely referenced by 'stored under their file name', which is ambiguous between the uploader's filename and the supplied name, and `content_type` is not mentioned at all. With zero schema descriptions, the description needed to carry this and does not.

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?

Opens with a concrete verb+resource+scope: a one-time link for one file up to 25 MB valid for an hour. It is distinguishable from files_upload and documents_create_pdf by what it produces (a link, not the file itself), though it never names files_upload explicitly to draw the contrast.

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?

Explicit when-to-use with concrete cases (contract to sign, scan, form), explicit when-not (a document you write needs no upload — use documents_create_pdf), plus a fallback path when the sandbox can't reach api.conecto.chat. It also rules out the wrong approach (never type a file out as base64), which is exactly the failure mode an agent would pick.

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

All Conecto tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?