uplika

Start a direct image upload

media_presign

Step 1 of attaching an image or video. Returns a media id and a one-time uploadUrl. PUT the file bytes to uploadUrl with the same contentType, then call media_complete. Images: image/jpeg, image/png, up to 8MB. Video: video/mp4, video/quicktime, up to 1GB, 300 seconds, 1920px wide. Aspect ratio up to 10:1. Any image pixel width is fine. If you can see the image, write altText describing it. The response has mediaExpiresAt: this media id disappears after that time if it was never published, and publish will then fail with media_expired.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`bytes`	Yes	File size in bytes
`width`	No	Pixel width, if you know it
`height`	No	Pixel height, if you know it
`altText`	No	What the image shows, for people using screen readers. Write it whenever you can see the image. Applied to carousel items.
`fileName`	Yes
`contentType`	Yes	image/jpeg or image/png or video/mp4 or video/quicktime
`workspaceId`	No	Which workspace this is for. Only needed when the account has more than one — the error tells you the ids when it matters. Leave it out if it is already decided; do not ask the person again.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses important behavioral details beyond annotations: the uploadUrl is one-time, the media id expires after mediaExpiresAt, and publish fails with media_expired if never published. It also specifies upload limits and altText guidance, making the tool's behavior highly transparent.

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 and front-loaded: it starts with the tool's role and immediate output, then flows logically through the upload steps, constraints, altText guidance, and expiry behavior. Every sentence adds value, and nothing is redundant or fluff.

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?

Given the lack of an output schema, the description thoroughly explains the return values (media id, uploadUrl, mediaExpiresAt) and the overall workflow. It covers step-by-step instructions, limits, and error conditions, making it complete for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

While the schema already covers most parameters (86% coverage), the description adds meaningful semantic details: the contentType must match when PUTting bytes, altText should be written if the image is visible, and workspaceId is only needed when the account has multiple workspaces. These go beyond the schema descriptions.

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 clearly states 'Step 1 of attaching an image or video' and identifies the specific resource ('direct image upload') and action (returns a media id and a one-time uploadUrl). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like media_complete and media_from_url by framing it as the initial step in a direct upload workflow.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides clear usage context: it is the first step for direct uploads, instructs to PUT bytes to uploadUrl, and explicitly directs users to call media_complete next. It also includes file type and size constraints that help decide when this tool is appropriate. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like media_from_url or media_upload_link.

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

All uplika tools Inspect

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

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, and descriptions actively steer usage (e.g., get_post vs open_post, list_posts vs list_channel_posts). A few pairs like list_accounts vs select_channels or get_post vs open_post still require careful reading to pick the right one, but the overlap is manageable.

Naming Consistency4/5

The dominant pattern is verb_noun (delete_post, get_insights, list_accounts, select_channels), which is consistent and predictable. A few bare-verb names like publish and reply, plus the media_* prefixed tools, break the strict pattern but still feel coherent within their subdomains.

Tool Count4/5

20 tools is on the heavier side, but the breadth is justified by the server's scope: publishing, media upload workflows, reply threads, insights, quotas, and account selection. Each tool has a real job, though the four post-retrieval variants and five media tools could feel redundant at a glance.

Completeness4/5

The core lifecycle is well covered: publish, reply, delete, retry, retrieve, list, and get insights, plus multi-step media handling. Minor gaps exist, such as no general post editing, no delete-reply action beyond hiding, and limited scheduling outside YouTube, but these are not critical for the stated purpose.

Resources

Need Help?