Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

mcp-server

by me.ceki
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Upload File

upload-file

[Auth Required] Upload a file (image, document, video). Returns user_files record with id (use in comment/event files[]) and url.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "file_data": "<file_data>",
      "file_name": "<file_name>"
    },
    "name": "upload-file"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
file_dataYesBase64-encoded file content
file_nameYesOriginal filename with extension (e.g. screenshot.png, report.pdf)
mime_typeNoMIME type (e.g. image/png, application/pdf, video/mp4)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations are empty, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that authentication is required and specifies the return shape (id and url) and downstream usage. It does not cover file size limits or error handling, but the core behavior is clear.

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 one sentence plus a bracketed auth flag. Every word adds value—auth, file types, return record, and downstream usage—with no redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple (3 params, no nested objects) and the description covers purpose, auth, and key return fields. However, without an output schema, it does not fully describe the user_files record structure or error conditions.

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?

The input schema already describes all three parameters (file_data, file_name, mime_type) with individual descriptions. The tool description adds no extra parameter-specific detail, so baseline 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 states the tool uploads a file and returns a user_files record with id and url. 'Upload' is a specific verb, and no sibling tool offers file upload, so it is well differentiated.

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 notes the returned id can be used in comment/event files[], implying the upload is a prerequisite for attaching files. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but no sibling tool competes for the same purpose.

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

All mcp-server toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources