Duvo MCP

Create Clarity Team Document Upload Url

createClarityTeamDocumentUploadUrl

Create a signed URL for uploading a PDF, TXT, Markdown, or BPMN document as a team-level Clarity capture

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`team_id`	No	Duvo team UUID to operate on. API keys are pinned to a single team — omit this (it falls back to the key's team) or pass that same team; a different team is rejected. OAuth callers, who can span multiple teams, should pass the target team here.
`fileName`	Yes	Name of the document file
`contentType`	Yes	MIME type of the document

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, so this is a non-read, non-destructive mutation. The description adds that the tool creates a signed URL (not the upload itself), which is a key behavioral trait beyond the annotations. The file format restrictions and team scope are also disclosed. No contradictions with annotations.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that clearly states the action, resource, file types, and scope. It is concise with no filler, front-loading the core purpose at the beginning.

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 tool has 3 parameters (100% schema coverage), no output schema, and annotations covering safety, the description adequately explains the tool's purpose and scope. It could be improved by noting that the signed URL is typically used for a subsequent PUT request, but it remains complete for an upload URL creation tool.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters. The description lists supported file types (PDF, TXT, Markdown, BPMN) that map to the contentType enum, which adds useful context. However, it does not add meaning beyond the schema for 'team_id' or 'fileName', so baseline 3 plus 1 for the added file type context.

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 specifies the verb ('create'), the resource ('signed URL for uploading a PDF, TXT, Markdown, or BPMN document'), and the context ('team-level Clarity capture'). It effectively distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'createClarityDocumentUploadUrl' (non-team) and 'createClarityArtifactImportUploadUrl' (artifact import).

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 implies when to use this tool (when you need to upload a supported document to a team's Clarity capture), and the file types and scope are explicit. Among 100+ siblings, specific alternatives like 'createClarityDocumentUploadUrl' for non-team uploads exist, but the description does not explicitly name when not to use this tool or mention alternatives, leaving some gap.

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

All Duvo MCP 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

B3.1/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

Despite detailed descriptions, many tool names are highly ambiguous, with multiple tools covering the same conceptual actions (e.g., acceptClarityCaptureSuggestion vs. acceptClarityTeamAssignmentSuggestion, or the many deleteClarity*Interview tools). The set is so large that distinguishing between, say, listClarityFolders, listClarityProcesses, and listClarityProcessSummaries requires reading deep into descriptions, reducing agent selection accuracy.

Naming Consistency4/5

The naming convention is predominantly verb_noun (e.g., createClarityProcess, listAgents, deleteQueue), and is remarkably consistent across the 316 tools. There are only minor deviations, such as 'fileSuggestedClarityProcesses' (verb + adjective noun) and 'bulkUpdateCasePriority' (where 'bulk' could be seen as a prefix), but overall the pattern holds strongly.

Tool Count1/5

With 316 tools, this server is extremely oversized for any single agent to manage effectively. The massive number of tools suggests poor modularization—many of these tools likely belong in separate, smaller servers focused on specific domains (e.g., Clarity, Pulse, Agent management). The cognitive load for an agent to choose from 316 options is very high, leading to frequent misselection.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers an extraordinarily wide range of operations across the Duvo platform: agents, runs, cases, queues, Clarity processes, skills, integrations, notifications, teams, and more. Most resource types have full CRUD and lifecycle management. Notable minor gaps exist (e.g., no tools for managing specific notification batch severities dynamically, and some interview management is missing batch operations), but for the platform's scope, coverage is impressively thorough.

Resources

Need Help?