Skip to main content
Glama

Hatch

by com.viberooster
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Upload files to an existing site

upload
DestructiveIdempotent

Add or replace files on an EXISTING roost. Pass hatchId plus a manifest listing each file's path, size, and optional content type. Returns one presigned PUT URL per file — upload bytes directly via HTTP (e.g. curl -T file.png -H 'Content-Type: image/png' "$url"). Files go live immediately as each PUT completes; no separate publish call is needed. Use after regenerating a dashboard locally; Hatch does not schedule regenerations.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
policyNoHITL policy override. Under `required`, may fork a sibling `{slug}-vN` instead of overwriting.
hatchIdNoHatch id from the original hatch response.
manifestYes
tenantIdNoLegacy alias for `hatchId` from the original hatch response.
hitlTitleNoModal title for auto-opened HITL.
webhookUrlNoWebhook for auto-opened HITL.
sessionTokenNoOptional paired session token from poll_pairing (when Authorization headers are unavailable).
expiresSecondsNoURL TTL in seconds (default 3600).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / hitlTitle
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Modal title for auto-opened HITL.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / policy
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "HITL policy override. Under `required`, may fork a sibling `{slug}-vN` instead of overwriting.",
+  "enum": [
+    "required",
+    "good_effort"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / webhookUrl
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Webhook for auto-opened HITL.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / hatchId
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Hatch id from the original hatch response.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / tenantId / description
      Previous value: -"Tenant id from the original hatch response."New value: +"Legacy alias for `hatchId` from the original hatch response."
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "tenantId",
-  "manifest"
-]New value: +[
+  "manifest"
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark this tool as destructive/non-read-only, and the description adds important mechanics: it returns one presigned PUT URL per file, requires direct HTTP upload, and states files go live immediately with no separate publish call. This goes beyond the annotation hints, though partial-failure or idempotency behavior is not elaborated.

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?

Four dense sentences, each earning its place: purpose, required inputs, return/upload behavior, and usage context. The most important scoping, EXISTING roost, is front-loaded.

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?

For a complex 8-parameter tool with a nested manifest and no output schema, the description covers the return contract (presigned PUT URLs), the direct upload flow, and the no-publish consequence. Schema covers the remaining parameters; only auth prerequisites and error/partial-failure behavior are left implied.

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?

With 88% schema coverage, the schema carries most parameter meaning. Still, the description adds the key invocation relationship 'Pass hatchId plus a manifest,' clarifies that content type is optional, and includes a concrete curl example, which helps an agent assemble the call beyond the raw schema.

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 action and object: 'Add or replace files on an EXISTING roost.' The word EXISTING and the note that 'Hatch does not schedule regenerations' differentiate this from hatch and similar siblings, so an agent can tell exactly what the tool is for.

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?

It gives a clear trigger: 'Use after regenerating a dashboard locally; Hatch does not schedule regenerations.' This states when upload is appropriate and contrasts with hatch, though it does not enumerate explicit exclusions or other alternative tools beyond that one context.

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

All Hatch toolsInspect
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