agentView

Upload Asset

upload_asset

Upload one or more files (images, fonts, CSS, video, etc.) as assets and receive stable URLs. Use these URLs in your HTML with or @font-face. Assets are cached on displays. Pass files as base64-encoded data. Requires authentication with at least content_only scope.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`files`	Yes	Array of file objects, each with 'name' (filename with extension) and 'data' (base64-encoded content).
`group_id`	No	Optional group ID to associate the assets with.
`access_token`	No	Optional bearer token; prefer session_request_id.
`descriptions`	Yes	JSON object mapping each filename to a human-readable description.
`session_request_id`	No	Session handle from create_auth_session; pass it on every authenticated call.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	No
`assets`	No

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond annotations, the description adds meaningful behavioral details: files are base64-encoded, assets are cached on displays, and authentication requires at least content_only scope. It does not contradict annotations and provides useful operational context.

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 tightly written: purpose, usage context, encoding behavior, and auth requirement each earn their place. It is front-loaded with the core action and avoids redundant filler.

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?

Given the schema and output schema cover structured details, the description is nearly complete: it explains the main use case, encoding requirement, cache behavior, and auth constraints. The required 'descriptions' parameter is not highlighted in prose, but the schema documents it fully.

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 baseline is 3. The description reinforces that files are base64-encoded and supports multiple files, but it adds little meaning beyond what the schema already documents for individual parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('Upload') and resource ('files... as assets') and clearly states the outcome ('receive stable URLs'). It differentiates from sibling tools by framing uploads against delete/get/list/update assets with no ambiguity.

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?

Clear use context is provided: upload files to be referenced in HTML via <img src> or @font-face, with stable URLs and display caching. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use this tool, but the context is strong enough to guide selection.

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

All agentView 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

A4/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools map cleanly to distinct resource-action pairs (displays, organizations, assets, data slots, store templates, auth). A few clusters like the get_store_template_* family and the auth/session tools could still confuse an agent, but their descriptions are explicit enough to separate them.

Naming Consistency4/5

The dominant pattern is consistent verb_noun snake_case (list_*, get_*, create_*, delete_*, send_*, set_*, manage_*). Deviations like fetch, search, authenticate, logout, and pair_by_code are understandable but break the otherwise uniform naming scheme.

Tool Count1/5

With 57 tools this server far exceeds the 50+ threshold, creating an extreme tool-set size for an MCP server. Even though the underlying platform is feature-rich, the sheer number of tools heavily taxes context and selection.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers display, organization, asset, data slot, store template, auth, API key, and licensing lifecycles in impressive depth. Minor gaps exist, such as no delete operation for display categories and no reboot/power control for displays.

Resources

Need Help?