Skip to main content
Glama

qencode

by com.qencode

download_url_to_bucket

Server-side copy of a public URL into a bucket (no transcoding).

The server fetches `source_url` itself and streams the bytes straight into
the bucket via a short-lived presigned upload — use this to ingest an
existing asset into Qencode Media Storage as-is. To store a *transcoded*
result instead, set a `destination` on a transcoding job.

IMPORTANT — this call is synchronous and blocking: it returns only after the
whole file has been fetched and uploaded, and there is no job token or
progress to poll (unlike transcoding). The transfer must finish inside the
presigned upload window (~10 minutes) and is size-capped server-side, so it
suits small/medium assets; very large or slow sources may time out — upload
those out-of-band instead.

Args:
    source_url: a publicly reachable `http(s)` URL the server can fetch
        directly. Non-http(s) schemes and private/loopback hosts are
        rejected up front; a source that responds with a redirect or a
        4xx/5xx fails the transfer.
    bucket: destination bucket name.
    key: destination object key (e.g. `raw/input.mov`). An existing object
        at this key is overwritten.

Returns `{bucket, key, size_bytes, status: "uploaded"}`.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYes
bucketYes
source_urlYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYes
bucketYes
statusYes
size_bytesYes

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

The description discloses that the call is synchronous, blocking, size-capped, and limited to a ~10 minute presigned upload window, all valuable behavioral context. However, it contradicts the annotations: it states 'An existing object at this key is overwritten' while annotations mark `destructiveHint: false`. This is a direct conflict, so the score is 1.

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 well-structured: a one-line summary, a paragraph on mechanics, an 'IMPORTANT' callout, and cleanly formatted Args and Returns. It is detailed but every sentence provides necessary caveats or context, making effective use of length.

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?

The description covers the tool's flow, constraints, parameters, return value, and alternatives. It even specifies the return shape `{bucket, key, size_bytes, status: 'uploaded'}` and edge cases like redirects and timeouts. With an output schema present, the textual return explanation is a bonus; the description leaves no major gaps.

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

Parameters5/5

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

The schema provides only names/types with no descriptions, so the description carries the full burden. It adds rich semantics: `source_url` must be a publicly reachable http(s) URL and rejects non-http(s), private/loopback hosts, redirects, and 4xx/5xx; `key` explains destination path and overwrite behavior. This goes far beyond the schema's bare field names.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Server-side copy of a public URL into a bucket (no transcoding).' This clearly identifies the primary action and differentiates it from transcoding tools. It also notes 'use this to ingest an existing asset into Qencode Media Storage as-is,' reinforcing its distinct purpose.

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 tells when to use this tool: 'use this to ingest an existing asset into Qencode Media Storage as-is.' It contrasts with transcoding: 'To store a *transcoded* result instead, set a `destination` on a transcoding job' and advises out-of-band uploads for very large sources: 'upload those out-of-band instead.' This is clear usage guidance.

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

All qencode toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools are clearly distinct (list_buckets vs list_objects, search vs fetch docs). Minor overlap exists between transcode_video and start_encode2_raw (both submit jobs) and between get_job_status and get_job_status_detailed, but the descriptions explicitly state when to use which, making misselection unlikely.

Naming Consistency4/5

Names overwhelmingly follow verb_noun (create_bucket, list_buckets, get_download_url, transcode_video). A few deviations like start_encode2_raw, wait_for_job, and download_url_to_bucket break the pure pattern, but the convention is still easily predictable.

Tool Count5/5

13 tools is well-scoped for a video encoding platform: bucket management, transcoding submission/status/wait, result retrieval, and docs search/read. Each tool serves a clear purpose without redundancy or bloat.

Completeness4/5

The set covers the main lifecycle: create bucket, ingest via copy, transcode (two entry points), poll status, fetch result, and generate download URLs. Missing cancel/delete operations for jobs and buckets are notable but not critical for core workflows, and the docs tools help fill knowledge gaps.

Resources