Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
BlindPay MCP Server

BlindPay MCP Server

by blindpaylabs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Post Presign

PostV1Presign

Generates a presigned URL to access a BlindPay file previously uploaded via POST /upload, rejecting URLs from any other host.

Instructions

Presign File URL

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": {
      "instance_id": "<instance_id>",
      "requestBody": "<requestBody>"
    },
    "name": "PostV1Presign"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
instance_idYes
requestBodyYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.9.3

TDQS

D1.3/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

Annotations declare a non-read-only, non-idempotent, open-world write operation, but the description adds no behavioral context at all: no mention of side effects, expiry of the resulting URL, auth requirements, or error conditions for foreign hosts. The full burden was on the description and it carries none of it.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three words is technically concise, but here brevity is under-specification rather than economy. Nothing is front-loaded because nothing of substance is stated.

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

Completeness1/5

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

For a two-parameter nested-body write tool with no output schema, the description should at minimum explain that it returns a signed URL tied to a previously uploaded file. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is present.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is reported as 0%; instance_id is completely undocumented and the only hint about file_url lives in the schema itself, not the description. The description contributes no meaning about either required parameter or the nested requestBody.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Presign File URL' essentially restates the tool title 'Post Presign' and offers no verb beyond the name. It does not explain what a presigned URL is for here, nor distinguish this from file-upload or document siblings in the listing.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

There is no guidance on when to call this versus any other tool, no mention of prerequisites (e.g. that the file must already be uploaded via POST /upload), and no stated alternatives among the many sibling endpoints.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools