strip_fileRemoves the C2PA content credential from a file and returns a download link for the cleaned copy. Pixels, frames and samples stay untouched.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | Publicly reachable http(s) URL of an image, video or audio file. Local paths do not work with this hosted server. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explicitly discloses the output (a download link for a cleaned copy) and gives a meaningful behavioral guarantee that pixels, frames, and samples stay untouched. It does not cover all edge cases or failure modes, but it addresses the most important side-effect concern.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two sentences with no wasted words. The primary action and output are front-loaded, and the statement about pixels/frames/samples is a concise, high-value clarification.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a single-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the input, the operation, the output, and the key behavioral constraint. There is no obvious missing information an agent would need to correctly select and invoke this tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema already provides 100% coverage for the only parameter, url, including a clear description of what kinds of URLs are accepted. The tool description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline score of 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb ('Removes') with a clear object ('C2PA content credential') and names the output ('download link'). It clearly distinguishes from the sibling tool inspect_file, whose purpose is inspection, not modification.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies when to use this tool — when you need to strip a content credential — but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention the alternative inspect_file. The usage context is evident from the purpose, but the routing guidance is only implied.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: one reads/inspects the C2PA credential, the other removes it. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them, and the descriptions reinforce the intended action.
Both tools follow the same verb_noun pattern: inspect_file and strip_file. The naming is consistent, intuitive, and clearly indicates the action performed on the target.
The server has only two tools, which feels thin even for a narrow unmarking purpose. However, the domain itself is simple, so the count is borderline but not unreasonable.
For a server focused on removing C2PA credentials, the inspect and strip operations cover the essential workflow completely. There are no obvious dead ends or missing core actions within this narrowly scoped domain.