Skip to main content
Glama

update_image

Update visibility, TTL, or the private view link of a hosted image.

Caller must own it.

visibility flips the access level: "public" or "private". Omit to leave unchanged.

ttl_seconds and permanent are mutually exclusive. permanent clears the expiry so the image lives indefinitely. ttl_seconds sets a new expiry relative to now (positive integer). Omitting both leaves the current expiry unchanged.

rotate_view_secret issues a fresh private view link and invalidates every link shared earlier for this image, so use it to un-share a private image. For a private image the returned url is the current view link.

Returns the updated image record. Raises image_not_found (404) when the image is absent, expired, or owned by another user.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
image_idYesThe hosted image to act on, identified by its UUID.
permanentNoClear the expiry so the image lives indefinitely; mutually exclusive with ttl_seconds.
visibilityNoNew access level: 'public' or 'private'; omit to leave unchanged.
ttl_secondsNoNew expiry in seconds from now; mutually exclusive with permanent.
rotate_view_secretNoIssue a fresh private view link and revoke every link shared earlier for this image. Use to un-share a private image.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / rotate_view_secret
      Added value: +{
      +  "default": false,
      +  "description": "Issue a fresh private view link and revoke every link shared earlier for this image. Use to un-share a private image.",
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Discloses all behavioral traits: visibility flips access level, ttl vs permanent effects, rotate_view_secret invalidates old links, and return of updated record. No contradiction with annotations (all false).

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Well-organized with bullet points and front-loaded purpose. Each sentence serves a purpose, though could be slightly more concise for very high score.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown but indicated), the description covers usage, parameters, errors, and ownership fully, leaving no gaps for an agent to make mistakes.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, but description adds critical context like mutual exclusivity and the consequence of rotate_view_secret, going beyond schema descriptions. Slight deduction because the schema already covers basics well.

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 explicitly states 'Update visibility, TTL, or the private view link of a hosted image', identifying specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like delete_image, get_image, and upload_image.

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?

Provides clear when-to-use conditions: 'Caller must own it.' and explains mutual exclusivity of ttl_seconds and permanent. Describes error scenarios (404 for absent/expired/owned by another).

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.