Upload media (image or video) to SocialClaw hosted storage. Provide either sourceUrl (a public URL the server downloads) or contentBase64. Returns an asset id and a public URL usable as media_link in schedules.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| filename | Yes | Filename including extension, e.g. launch.png. | |
| sourceUrl | No | Public URL to download the media from. | |
| contentBase64 | No | Base64-encoded file content (alternative to sourceUrl). |
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?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It explains that the server downloads from a public URL or accepts base64, and returns an asset id and public URL. However, it omits important traits like file size limits, supported formats (beyond 'image or video'), and authentication requirements. This provides some transparency but not full.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and resource. Every word contributes: target storage, input methods, and return value. No redundancy or fluff.
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 low-complexity tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential return values (asset id, public URL) and usage context (media_link). It doesn't mention edge cases like both parameters being provided or error handling, but those are not critical for basic invocation. Minor gaps like size limits are acceptable given the simplicity.
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?
Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by stating that sourceUrl is a public URL the server downloads and that contentBase64 is an alternative, implying mutual exclusivity and the server-side fetching behavior. This goes beyond the schema's basic property descriptions.
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?
Description uses a specific verb 'Upload' and names the resource 'media to SocialClaw hosted storage'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like list_assets and get_post by focusing on the write operation. The scope is well-defined: images or videos.
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?
It conveys when to use the tool (to upload media for use as media_link in schedules) and explains two input methods (sourceUrl or contentBase64). It does not explicitly exclude any scenarios or name alternative tools, but there are no apparent upload-specific siblings, so the context is sufficient.
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.
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but a few are close: delete_instagram_comment vs hide_instagram_comment overlap (though one is preferred), and get_analytics overlaps with Instagram-specific analytics tools. Overall, the boundaries are generally clear, with only minor potential confusion.
All tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (e.g., list_accounts, connect_account, upload_asset, cancel_post). There are no deviations in style or grammar, making the naming highly predictable.
With 31 tools, this exceeds the 25-tool threshold for 'too many'. While the broad multi-provider social media domain justifies some breadth, the sheer number makes the surface heavy and potentially overwhelming, pushing the score down.
The tool set covers core workflows well: account connection, scheduling/publishing, post management, analytics, Instagram-specific engagement (comments, messages), asset upload, and workspace health/usage. Minor gaps include no explicit disconnect_account or delete_post, but these are edge cases; the domain is largely covered.
