photos-mcp

Photos Upload

photos_upload

Idempotent

Add a photo or video to a Google Photos library from a public HTTPS URL or base64 data, optionally placing it in an album and skipping items already in the library.

Instructions

Add one photo or video to the library (and to an album): the file at a public https link (url), or one you have as base64 (data). A file the library already holds is not added again (already_in_library). Returns the item {id, url, type, filename, taken_at, tz_known, width, height, uploaded_at} and the album afterwards. For the person's own files, or a file on disk, use photos_upload_link.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "photos_upload"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`url`	No	A public https link to the photo or video
`data`	No	Or the file itself, base64 (up to 10 MiB)
`album_id`	No	Also put it in this album (photos_albums)
`filename`	No	Its name in the library (default: from the link or date)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.11.3Oct 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare not-readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, non-destructive, so the safety profile is known. The description adds concrete behavior beyond that: duplicate detection ('already_in_library'), the returned item fields, and the album side effect ('the album afterwards'). It does not cover auth/prerequisites or upload limits beyond what the schema states, which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and the two source modes, then the dedup note, then return shape and the sibling pointer. Dense but every clause carries information; the inline enumeration of returned fields is slightly verbose given an output schema exists.

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?

Given an output schema and full annotation coverage, the description supplies what's missing: source-mode choice, duplicate handling, and the cross-tool routing to photos_upload_link. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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%, so the baseline is 3; however the description adds that url and data are alternative sources (mutually exclusive in practice, which the schema's anyOf does not enforce) and that album_id targets a photos_albums album. filename default is repeated from the schema, limiting the added value.

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?

Starts with a concrete verb+resource ('Add one photo or video to the library') and immediately disambiguates the two input modes (public https url vs base64 data). It also names the alternate sibling photos_upload_link for files on disk, so an agent can distinguish it without reading schemas.

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?

Explicitly states when to pick each path ('public https link (url), or one you have as base64 (data)') and when to route elsewhere ('For the person's own files, or a file on disk, use photos_upload_link'). That is a named alternative with the condition that selects it.

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

Deploy Server