Skip to main content
Glama
Tencent

Tencent Cloud COS MCP Server

Official
by Tencent

putObject

Upload local files to a specified bucket and directory in Tencent Cloud Object Storage (COS) using file path, name, and target directory details for efficient storage management.

Instructions

上传本地文件到存储桶

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fileNameNo文件名 (存在存储桶里的名称)
filePathYes文件路径 (包含文件名)
targetDirNo目标目录 (存在存储桶的哪个目录)

Implementation Reference

  • src/server.ts:84-111 (registration)
    Registration of the 'putObject' MCP tool, including input schema using Zod and a thin handler that calls CosService.uploadFile
    server.tool(
      'putObject',
      '上传本地文件到存储桶',
      {
        filePath: z.string().describe('文件路径 (包含文件名)'),
        fileName: z.string().optional().describe('文件名 (存在存储桶里的名称)'),
        targetDir: z
          .string()
          .optional()
          .describe('目标目录 (存在存储桶的哪个目录)'),
      },
      async ({ fileName, filePath, targetDir }) => {
        const res = await COSInstance.uploadFile({
          fileName,
          filePath,
          targetDir,
        });
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: 'text',
              text: JSON.stringify(res.data, null, 2),
            },
          ],
          isError: !res.isSuccess,
        };
      },
    );
  • Main handler implementation in CosService.uploadFile: validates params, checks file existence, builds COS key, and calls cos.uploadFile to upload the local file
    async uploadFile(params: UploadFileParams) {
      // 验证并解析参数
      const validParams = UploadFileParamsSchema.parse(params);
      const { filePath, targetDir = '', fileName } = validParams;
      try {
        // 检查文件是否存在
        if (!filePath || !fs.existsSync(filePath)) {
          return {
            isSuccess: false,
            message: '此路径上文件不存在',
            data: '此路径上文件不存在: ' + filePath,
          };
        }
        // 确定文件名
        const actualFileName = fileName || path.basename(filePath);
    
        // 构建COS路径
        const cosPath = this.buildCosPath(actualFileName, targetDir);
    
        // 上传文件
        const cosParams: COS.UploadFileParams = {
          Bucket: this.bucket,
          Region: this.region,
          Key: cosPath,
          FilePath: filePath,
        };
    
        const result = await this.cos.uploadFile(cosParams);
    
        return {
          isSuccess: true,
          message: '上传成功',
          data: result,
        };
      } catch (error) {
        return {
          isSuccess: false,
          message: '上传失败',
          data: error,
        };
      }
    }
  • Zod schema for uploadFile parameters used by the service handler
    export const UploadFileParamsSchema = z.object({
      filePath: z.string().optional(),
      targetDir: z.string().optional(),
      fileName: z.string().optional(),
      sourceUrl: z.string().optional()
    });
  • Helper method to build the COS object key path from fileName and optional targetDir
    private buildCosPath(fileName: string, targetDir?: string): string {
      if (!targetDir) {
        return fileName;
      }
      
      // 规范化目标目录:移除头尾斜杠
      const normalizedDir = targetDir.replace(/^\/+|\/+$/g, '');
      return normalizedDir ? `${normalizedDir}/${fileName}` : fileName;
    }
  • Input schema defined directly in the tool registration for putObject parameters
    {
      filePath: z.string().describe('文件路径 (包含文件名)'),
      fileName: z.string().optional().describe('文件名 (存在存储桶里的名称)'),
      targetDir: z
        .string()
        .optional()
        .describe('目标目录 (存在存储桶的哪个目录)'),
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the upload action but doesn't mention permissions needed, rate limits, whether the operation is idempotent, what happens on conflicts (e.g., overwriting existing files), or error conditions. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 waste. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, directly stating the tool's purpose without unnecessary elaboration.

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 file upload tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks information about return values (e.g., success confirmation, error details), behavioral traits like overwrite behavior or permissions, and differentiation from sibling tools. This leaves significant gaps for an AI agent to use it correctly.

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 already documents all three parameters well. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema (e.g., it doesn't clarify relationships between fileName, filePath, and targetDir). Baseline 3 is appropriate when the 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 '上传本地文件到存储桶' clearly states the action (upload) and target (local file to storage bucket). It's specific about what the tool does, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'putObjectSourceUrl' which likely uploads from a URL instead of a local file.

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. It doesn't mention sibling tools like 'putObjectSourceUrl' (for URL-based uploads) or 'getObject' (for downloads), nor does it specify prerequisites or contexts for use.

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

Related 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/Tencent/cos-mcp'

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