Skip to main content
Glama

addFileToGroup

Add an existing file to a Pinata group for organized IPFS content management using file and group IDs.

Instructions

Add an existing file to a group in your Pinata account

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
networkNoWhether the group and file are in public or private IPFSpublic
groupIdYesThe ID of the group to add the file to
fileIdYesThe ID of the file to add to the group

Implementation Reference

  • src/index.ts:874-913 (registration)
    Tool registration for 'addFileToGroup' with schema definition (network, groupId, fileId) and handler implementation that makes a PUT request to Pinata API to add an existing file to a group
    server.tool(
      "addFileToGroup",
      "Add an existing file to a group in your Pinata account",
      {
        network: z
          .enum(["public", "private"])
          .default("public")
          .describe("Whether the group and file are in public or private IPFS"),
        groupId: z.string().describe("The ID of the group to add the file to"),
        fileId: z.string().describe("The ID of the file to add to the group"),
      },
      async ({ network, groupId, fileId }) => {
        try {
          const url = `https://api.pinata.cloud/v3/groups/${network}/${groupId}/ids/${fileId}`;
    
          const response = await fetch(url, {
            method: "PUT",
            headers: getHeaders(),
          });
    
          if (!response.ok) {
            throw new Error(
              `Failed to add file to group: ${response.status} ${response.statusText}`
            );
          }
    
          const data = await response.json();
          return {
            content: [
              {
                type: "text",
                text: `✅ File added to group successfully\n\n${JSON.stringify(data, null, 2)}`,
              },
            ],
          };
        } catch (error) {
          return errorResponse(error);
        }
      }
    );
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the basic operation without disclosing behavioral traits. It doesn't mention permissions needed, whether this is idempotent, rate limits, error conditions, or what happens if the file is already in the group. This leaves significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core action, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, error handling, or important behavioral context like idempotency or side effects. Given the complexity of modifying group-file relationships, more guidance is needed.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all parameters (network, groupId, fileId). The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying 'existing file' and 'group', which is already covered by parameter descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the action ('Add') and resources ('existing file', 'group in your Pinata account'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'removeFileFromGroup' or 'createGroup', which would require mentioning this is for existing files/groups rather than creation or removal operations.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'removeFileFromGroup' or 'createGroup'. It mentions 'existing file' and 'group' but doesn't clarify prerequisites (e.g., both must already exist) or exclusions (e.g., not for creating new groups).

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/PinataCloud/pinata-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server