Skip to main content
Glama
asachs01

Autotask MCP Server

by asachs01

autotask_create_ticket_attachment

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

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the base64 encoding requirement, the 3 MB hard limit with validation, and clear error responses. It does not mention idempotence or permissions, but the key behavioral traits are well covered.

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 two focused sentences followed by a concrete example. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, then adds constraints and example. There is no redundant or wasted text.

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 has 6 parameters, 3 required, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is fairly complete. It covers purpose, constraints, and parameter usage. It is missing a description of the response format, which would improve completeness.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds value by explaining the base64 encoding, the size limit, and providing an example. It also clarifies the publish field's meaning. This goes beyond the schema definitions.

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 'Upload a file attachment to an existing ticket,' specifying the action (upload), resource (attachment), and context (existing ticket). It effectively distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like autotask_get_ticket_attachment (download) and autotask_search_ticket_attachments (search).

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 explains when to use the tool (to upload an attachment) and provides constraints: base64 encoding required and a 3 MB limit. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, so it lacks explicit exclusion criteria.

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