Skip to main content
Glama
asachs01

Autotask MCP Server

autotask_create_ticket_attachment

Upload a file attachment to an existing Autotask ticket by providing the ticket ID, filename, and base64-encoded file content. The tool validates the 3 MB size limit before sending.

Instructions

Upload a file attachment to an existing ticket. The file content must be passed as a base64-encoded string in the data field (MCP is JSON-RPC, so binary bytes must be base64-encoded). Autotask enforces a 3 MB hard limit on ticket attachments; this tool validates the decoded size before calling the API and returns a clear error if the limit is exceeded. Example: { ticketId: 12345, title: "screenshot.png", data: "iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAA..." }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ticketIdYesThe ticket ID to attach the file to
titleYesDisplay title for the attachment (typically the filename, e.g. "screenshot.png")
dataYesBase64-encoded file content. Maximum decoded size: 3 MB (Autotask ticket attachment limit). Example: read a file and pass its base64 representation here.
fullPathNoOriginal filename including any path. Defaults to `title` if not provided.
contentTypeNoMIME type of the file (e.g. "image/png", "application/pdf"). Optional.
publishNoVisibility: 1 = All Autotask Users (default), 2 = Internal Users Only
Behavior4/5

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

In the absence of annotations, the description fully discloses key behaviors: it enforces a 3 MB size limit, validates decoded size, returns clear error on exceedance, and explains base64 encoding necessity due to JSON-RPC. This goes beyond a basic 'upload' declaration.

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 extremely concise: three sentences plus an inline example. It front-loads the purpose and each subsequent sentence adds essential detail without redundancy. It is well-structured for quick understanding.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (file upload, size limits, encoding), the description covers all critical aspects. It does not detail return values or other error cases, but with no output schema, this is reasonable. The tool is sufficiently specified for correct invocation.

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

Parameters5/5

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

The description adds significant value beyond the schema: it explains why data must be base64-encoded, provides a concrete example, clarifies that fullPath defaults to title, and enumerates publish visibility options. Schema coverage is 100%, but the description enriches understanding.

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's purpose: 'Upload a file attachment to an existing ticket.' It identifies the specific resource (ticket attachment) and action (upload). It distinguishes from sibling tools like autotask_get_ticket_attachment and autotask_search_ticket_attachments by focusing on creation.

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?

The description provides clear usage context: when you need to attach a file to an existing ticket. It also conveys constraints (base64 encoding, 3 MB limit). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives, but given the specificity, this is acceptable.

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/asachs01/autotask-mcp'

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