printful-mcp-server

getFile

Retrieve details for a previously uploaded file via its file ID, including status and metadata, to manage print-on-demand design assets.

Instructions

Get info about a previously uploaded file

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_id": "<file_id>"
    },
    "name": "getFile"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`file_id`	Yes	The file ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get info' without elaborating on what info is returned, whether the file must exist, or how errors are handled. This is a minimal but not misleading description.

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 clear sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple getter tool.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description gives minimal but sufficient context: it retrieves info about a previously uploaded file. However, it lacks details about return format or error conditions, so it is adequate but not complete.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage with the 'file_id' parameter described as 'The file ID'. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get info') and resource ('previously uploaded file'), making clear this is a singular retrieval operation. It distinguishes from the sibling 'getFiles' which likely lists files, so the purpose is unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'getFiles' or 'uploadFile'. The phrase 'previously uploaded file' hints at a prerequisite but doesn't explicitly state exclusions or alternatives, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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