AbleSign MCP

initiate_media_upload

Initiate a media upload to AbleSign by providing filename, MIME type, and file size; obtain a signed PUT URL for direct upload.

Instructions

Start AbleSign's three-step upload flow and return its signed PUT 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": {
      "filename": "<filename>",
      "mime_type": "<mime_type>",
      "size": "<size>"
    },
    "name": "initiate_media_upload"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`size`	Yes
`filename`	Yes
`folder_id`	No
`mime_type`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses returning a signed PUT URL and hints at a multi-step flow, but omits side effects (e.g., whether a media record is created), idempotency, or authorization requirements.

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?

One sentence, no fluff, front-loaded with action and outcome. Every word earns its place.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Despite having 4 parameters and an output schema, the description is too brief. It doesn't explain the upload flow sequence, how the signed URL is used, or what the output schema contains. Leaves agent with significant gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description adds zero parameter details. Crucial parameters like 'size', 'mime_type', and 'folder_id' are not explained; only the term 'filename' is implicit from the description.

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 initiates a three-step upload flow and returns a signed PUT URL, with a specific verb 'Start' and resource 'AbleSign's three-step upload flow', distinguishing it from siblings like complete_media_upload.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., complete_media_upload, initiate_media_replacement), nor prerequisites or workflow context. The description only mentions a three-step flow without explaining steps.

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

Deploy Server