Skip to main content
Glama

source_upload

Copies a verified CSV, LAS, or SEG-Y snapshot (up to 256 MiB) from an authorized source folder into a project, using the file revision from source_scan before import.

Instructions

Copy a verified snapshot of a CSV/LAS/SEG-Y file from an authorized folder into the project (up to 256 MiB). Requires file_revision from source_scan; then dataset_import/seismic_import.

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": {
      "request": "<request>"
    },
    "name": "source_upload"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
requestYesTool arguments object (all fields documented; Z is positive upward).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (not read-only, not destructive, not idempotent, closed-world), so the description adds the operationally important extras: a 256 MiB ceiling, that the copy is revision-verified and rejected if the file changed since discovery, and that the source folder must be authorized. It does not say whether a repeat upload of the same revision duplicates the artifact, which matters given idempotentHint=false.

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?

Two sentences, no filler: capability and format/size scope first, then the workflow dependencies. Every clause carries information the agent needs before calling.

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

Completeness4/5

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

No output schema exists, and the description implies but never states what the upload yields (a dataset/handle to feed into dataset_import). Otherwise it covers the mutation semantics, size limit, and step ordering adequately for a single nested-request parameter.

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 coverage is 100% and every field is documented in the schema itself, including that file_revision comes from source_scan/folder_assess. The description's mention of file_revision provenance largely repeats the schema, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Copy a verified snapshot of a CSV/LAS/SEG-Y file ... into the project') plus the supported formats and a hard size bound. This clearly separates it from the sibling import tools (dataset_import, seismic_import), which it names as downstream steps rather than substitutes.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly places the tool in a workflow chain: 'Requires file_revision from source_scan; then dataset_import/seismic_import' tells the agent both the prerequisite and the successor. It stops short of stating when *not* to use it or how it differs from dataset_import_snapshot, which is an obvious near-neighbor.

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