Playgama MCP - Publish & Manage HTML5 Games

Start an archive upload

start_archive_upload

Destructive

Step 1 of 3 of uploading a build: a zip that meets the game requirements — read them with get_game_checklist and check the build against each item first. Answers uploadUrl and headers: PUT the zip there with exactly those headers within an hour, e.g. curl -T game.zip -H "Content-Type: application/zip" "<uploadUrl>", then call confirm_archive_upload.

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": {
      "applicationId": "<applicationId>",
      "name": "<name>",
      "contentSize": "<contentSize>"
    },
    "name": "start_archive_upload"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	Name of the archive as the console will show it. Put the build version in it, e.g. "coin-town-1.4.2" — the form keeps every archive it was given, and the version is how a human tells them apart. A trailing .zip is dropped.
`contentSize`	Yes	Exact size of the zip in bytes (`wc -c < game.zip`). The upload URL is signed for this length and the storage refuses any other. At most 314572800 bytes.
`applicationId`	Yes	Game id from list_applications

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 4, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / applicationId / description

Previous value: -"Application (game) id, as returned by list_applications"New value: +"Game id from list_applications"

Changed1 schema field changedOct 3, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / name / description

Previous value: -"Name of the archive as the cabinet will show it. Put the build version in it, e.g. \"coin-town-1.4.2\" — the form keeps every archive it was given, and the version is how a human tells them apart. A trailing .zip is dropped."New value: +"Name of the archive as the console will show it. Put the build version in it, e.g. \"coin-town-1.4.2\" — the form keeps every archive it was given, and the version is how a human tells them apart. A trailing .zip is dropped."

First observedSep 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare this is a write operation with destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, while the description adds valuable behavior: the tool returns uploadUrl and headers, the PUT must use those exact headers, and the URL expires within an hour. It does not explain why the operation is marked destructive or what happens if the upload is never confirmed, which keeps it short of a 5.

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 front-loaded with the step and purpose, then gives the prerequisite, the upload mechanics, and the next call. The curl example is compact and directly useful, with no wasted or redundant sentences.

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 three-parameter upload-initiation tool with no output schema, the description supplies the return fields, signing constraint, header requirement, time limit, prerequisite checklist, and follow-up step. An agent has enough information to invoke it correctly and continue the workflow.

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%, and the schema already explains name, contentSize, and applicationId in detail. The description adds the requirement that the zip meet game requirements but does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb and resource: it initiates step 1 of 3 of uploading a build archive. It also distinguishes this initiation step from the later confirm_archive_upload step, so an agent can tell which tool starts versus finishes the upload.

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 places the tool in a three-step workflow, requires reading get_game_checklist first and checking the build against each item, then directs the agent to PUT the zip to the returned uploadUrl and finally call confirm_archive_upload. The when-to-use and ordering guidance is unusually explicit.

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

All Playgama MCP - Publish & Manage HTML5 Games tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?