Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Tuqo

by ru.tuqo
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Add lead magnet file

add_autoreply_file

Add a lead magnet file to the site's auto-reply (up to 3 files; PDF, images, zip, txt; up to 50 MB each). The submitter downloads it via a link in the email on a brandable delivery page. Requires the Start plan or higher and free storage quota. Current files: get_autoreply.

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": {
      "site_id": "<site_id>",
      "file_name": "<file_name>",
      "content_base64": "<content_base64>"
    },
    "name": "add_autoreply_file"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
labelNoCaption on the delivery page (optional; change later in the panel or via REST)
site_idYesUUID of the site
file_nameYesFile name for download, e.g. 'Checklist.pdf'
content_base64YesFile content in base64

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / content_base64 / description
      Previous value: -"Содержимое файла в base64"New value: +"File content in base64"
    • changedInput schema / properties / file_name / description
      Previous value: -"Имя файла при скачивании (например «Чек-лист.pdf»)"New value: +"File name for download, e.g. 'Checklist.pdf'"
    • changedInput schema / properties / label / description
      Previous value: -"Подпись на странице выдачи (необязательно)"New value: +"Caption on the delivery page (optional; change later in the panel or via REST)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / site_id / description
      Previous value: -"UUID сайта"New value: +"UUID of the site"
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare write and non-destructive behavior. The description goes well beyond that by disclosing file count/type/size limits, plan and storage quota requirements, and the downstream effect that submitters download the file via a link on a brandable delivery page. 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 compact paragraph that front-loads the core purpose and then layers constraints, requirements, and a cross-reference without any filler. Every sentence earns its place.

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 tool's moderate complexity, no output schema, and annotations covering only safety hints, the description provides all essential context: what it does, limits, prerequisites, side effects, and where to check current state. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to call it correctly.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds parameter-relevant constraints beyond the schema: allowed file types (PDF, images, zip, txt), per-file size limit (50 MB), and maximum count (3 files), which directly constrain file_name and content_base64.

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 states a specific verb ('Add') and resource ('lead magnet file to the site's auto-reply'), with clear scope constraints. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like remove_autoreply_file and get_autoreply by focusing on adding a file and naming the latter as the way to view current files.

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?

It gives clear context for use: the limit of 3 files, allowed types, size cap, and plan/storage prerequisites. It also points to get_autoreply as the way to check current files, but does not explicitly state when to choose add versus remove or other autoreply-related tools.

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

All Tuqo toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources