Skip to main content
Glama

List Uploads

hudu_list_uploads
Read-onlyIdempotent

List all file uploads in Hudu with URL, name, MIME type, size, and attached record; filter results client-side for a specific asset, company, or article.

Instructions

List uploads in Hudu. An upload is a file attached to a Hudu record — an asset, website, procedure, password, company or article. Each carries a url, name, mime, size and the uploadable_type/uploadable_id pair naming what it is attached to.

Hudu documents no filter and no pagination on this endpoint: it returns the uploads for the whole instance in one response, and there is no company_id or uploadable_id parameter to narrow it. On an instance with many attachments the response can be large and may be truncated by this server's output budget — check truncated before treating the list as complete. Filter client-side on uploadable_type and uploadable_id to find the attachments of one record.

This server cannot upload files. The Hudu upload endpoint takes multipart/form-data, which hudu-mcp 0.1.0 does not implement, so there is no create tool here and no way to add an attachment through this interface — tell the user to attach the file in the Hudu web UI. Do not claim a file was uploaded.

Returns an object with items plus pagination facts. Note that the Hudu API returns no total count for any collection, so page_was_full is the only honest signal that more records exist — read pagination_note before concluding a list is complete.

Operation class: Read.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fieldsNoReturn only these top-level fields on each record. Use it to keep large lists small — e.g. ["id","name","company_id"]. Unknown field names are ignored.
response_formatNoOutput shape. 'json' (default) is compact and machine-readable; 'markdown' is easier for a person to read but larger.json
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, etc.), the description discloses several important behaviors: the endpoint returns the entire instance's uploads with no pagination, the response may be truncated by the server's output budget, there is no total count, and 'page_was_full' is the only honest signal for more records. It also states there is no upload capability, which is a critical limitation not derivable from annotations.

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?

The description is longer than average but every sentence serves a purpose: defining the resource, explaining endpoint limitations, flagging truncation, addressing the no-upload gap, and covering pagination facts. It is front-loaded with the purpose, and the 'Operation class: Read' line is slightly redundant with annotations but harmless.

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

Completeness5/5

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

With no output schema, the description fully compensates by explaining the return shape ('items' plus pagination facts), the meaning of 'page_was_full', the need to check 'truncated', and the absence of total counts. It also covers the tool's limitations in the broader context (no uploads possible), making the description complete for an agent to invoke and interpret results 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 baseline is 3; the schema already documents both parameters ('fields' and 'response_format') with clear descriptions. The description adds context about absent parameters (no company_id or uploadable_id) and advises client-side filtering, which is useful but does not meaningfully enhance the two parameters' semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('List uploads in Hudu') and then defines an upload as a file attached to a Hudu record, listing the attachable record types. It clearly distinguishes this list-all-uploads tool from the filtered/single-upload siblings like hudu_get_upload by stating there is no filter or pagination on the endpoint.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool and when not to: it notes there is no server-side filtering, advises client-side filtering to find one record's attachments, and warns that the response may be truncated so the agent must check 'truncated'. It also explicitly says the server cannot upload files and instructs the agent to tell the user to use the Hudu web UI, preventing a common misuse.

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/ZenixSolutions/hudu-mcp'

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