buildium-mcp

Buildium Upload File

buildium_upload_file

Destructive

Upload a local file to Buildium by handling its two-step presigned URL flow, including required category, entity, and upload path.

Instructions

Upload a local file to Buildium, handling both steps of its upload flow.

Bytes do not travel through the Buildium API. Buildium issues a short-lived AWS presigned PUT URL, and the file is sent there directly. Doing that by hand with buildium_call_endpoint does not work — call_endpoint would post the metadata and hand you a URL it cannot then PUT to. Use this instead.

file_path: path to the file on this machine title: the file's title in Buildium. In 'fixtures' write mode this must start with the fixture prefix (see buildium_health). category_id: from GET /v1/files/categories — required, and Buildium rejects the upload without a real one. entity_type: what the file is attached to — Rental, Lease, Tenant, Vendor, Association, RentalOwner, RentalUnit, and so on. entity_id: the ID of that record. upload_path: for files belonging to a bill, check, or task history, pass that resource's own uploads path, e.g. "/v1/bills/123/files/uploads". Only Buildium's seven upload-request endpoints are accepted here, in every mode.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`title`	Yes
`entity_id`	No
`file_path`	Yes
`category_id`	Yes
`description`	No
`entity_type`	No	Rental
`upload_path`	No	/v1/files/uploads

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it explains the two-step flow (presigned URL), the requirement for a real category_id, and the constraint on upload_path endpoints. It does not contradict any annotation and enriches understanding beyond the flags.

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 appropriately sized for a complex two-step upload. It front-loads the key behavioral insight (presigned URL) and then uses a clean bullet-style layout for parameters. While it is long, every sentence adds necessary information—no fluff—though it could be slightly tightened without losing clarity.

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 the tool's complexity (7 parameters, two-step upload flow, specific constraints), the description is comprehensive. It explains the mechanism, the required category, the accepted upload_paths, and parameter meanings. The output schema exists to document return values, so the description does not need to cover that. Nothing an agent needs to correctly invoke the tool is missing.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description must compensate, and it does so for 6 of 7 parameters. It explains file_path, title, category_id, entity_type, entity_id, and upload_path with meaning and constraints (e.g., category_id required and must come from GET /v1/files/categories). The 'description' parameter is not mentioned, but it is optional and self-explanatory, so the coverage is strong overall.

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 states the exact verb and resource: 'Upload a local file to Buildium, handling both steps of its upload flow.' It explicitly differentiates from the sibling buildium_call_endpoint by explaining why that tool cannot perform the upload, making the purpose unmistakable and distinguishing it from alternatives.

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 provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Doing that by hand with buildium_call_endpoint does not work... Use this instead.' It also details the presigned URL flow and the constraint that only Buildium's seven upload-request endpoints are accepted, giving clear conditions for correct usage.

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