Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
PocketMCP

PocketMCP

by Kailash-Sankar
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

upsert_documents

Insert or update text documents to populate the local vector database for semantic search. Store content with optional titles, metadata, and external IDs to enable offline retrieval and AI queries.

Instructions

Insert or update documents with text content

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": {
      "docs": "<docs>"
    },
    "name": "upsert_documents"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
docsYesArray of documents to upsert

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. While 'Insert or update' signals mutation, it fails to explain the upsert key logic (what field determines if it updates vs inserts), whether updates are partial or full overwrites, or potential failure modes.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Extremely brief at eight words with no redundancy. The phrase 'with text content' front-loads the essential requirement. However, given the lack of annotations, the extreme brevity leaves critical behavioral information unstated.

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?

Minimum viable given good schema coverage. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the description should explain the upsert matching behavior and return values. It leaves significant gaps for a mutation tool with sibling search functionality.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the structured schema already documents all parameters adequately. The description mentions 'text content', which aligns with the required 'text' field, but adds minimal semantic value beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific action ('Insert or update') and resource ('documents'), and the 'upsert' terminology distinguishes it from siblings delete_documents, list_documents, and search. However, it doesn't clarify the scope or matching logic (e.g., when it inserts vs updates).

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (like external_id for updates) or when to prefer delete_documents or search over this mutation tool.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools