Skip to main content
Glama

Export File

export_file

Export an applied template to a specific format (pdf, docx, md, tex, or png). Creates a new applied template file entry.

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": {
      "coverLetterId": "<coverLetterId>",
      "templateId": "<templateId>",
      "selectedTemplateName": "<selectedTemplateName>",
      "format": "<format>"
    },
    "name": "export_file"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
formatYesOutput file format
templateIdYesTemplate ID
coverLetterIdYesCover letter ID
selectedTemplateNameYesLaTeX template style key

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindYes
fileIdNo
formatNo
statusYes
viewUrlNo
fileNameNo
downloadUrlNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description adds a meaningful behavioral detail beyond the annotations by stating that it creates a new applied template file entry. This clarifies the non-read-only and non-idempotent nature signaled by the annotations, though it does not discuss permissions, overwrite behavior, or rate limits.

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 two short sentences, front-loads the core action, and includes the important side effect without unnecessary wording.

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?

The tool has rich structured data: full parameter descriptions, enums, annotations, and an output schema. The description covers the core action and the creation side effect, though it could better clarify when to use this instead of related download/file tools.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains all four required parameters and both enums. The description lists supported formats but does not add meaning beyond the enum already present in the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: exporting an applied template to a chosen format, and it lists the available formats. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from related siblings such as get_download_url or apply_template.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied by 'Export an applied template to a specific format,' but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over get_download_url or other file-listing/download tools. No exclusions or prerequisites are provided.

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.

Resources