Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

OurFamilyWizard MCP

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

ofw_upload_expense_pdf

Upload a PDF to OurFamilyWizard My Files for later attachment to an expense. Accepts a local path or signed HTTPS URL, requires confirmation, and returns a fileId.

Instructions

Upload a PDF to OurFamilyWizard My Files for later attachment to an expense. Accepts either a local path or a signed ChatGPT/oaiusercontent HTTPS URL plus fileName. Exactly one of path or url must be supplied. This tool accepts PDF files only and uploads them using the same SHARED file metadata as the OFW expense form so the returned fileId can be attached to an expense. A SHARED file is visible to the co-parent in My Files immediately, whatever the visibility of the expense it is later attached to (that is set separately by ofw_create_expense privateExpense). Asks the user to confirm first: a confirmation prompt where the client supports one; otherwise the first call performs NO write and returns a preview of exactly what would happen plus a confirmToken, and only a repeat call with that token proceeds (see MCP_CONFIRM_MODE).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNoSigned HTTPS oaiusercontent.com URL for a PDF supplied by the ChatGPT host. Mutually exclusive with path.
pathNoPath to a local PDF file inside the upload directory (OFW_UPLOAD_DIR). Tilde (~) is expanded by the configured attachment I/O implementation. Mutually exclusive with url.
labelNoDisplay label for the file in OFW (default: filename)
fileNameNoFilename to use for a remote URL upload. Must end in .pdf. Defaults to receipt.pdf.
descriptionNoDescription shown in OFW My Files (default: filename)
confirmTokenNoONLY for the two-step confirmation fallback (a client without MCP elicitation). The confirmToken from this same tool's phase-1 "confirmation-required" response, passed back ONLY after the user has seen that preview and explicitly approved it in chat — never on the first call, never invented, never reused. Call again with the same arguments. Ignored when the client supports elicitation.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv2.20.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true; the description goes well beyond that by disclosing the SHARED file metadata, that the file becomes visible to the co-parent immediately regardless of the later expense's visibility, and the full preview/token confirmation fallback with MCP_CONFIRM_MODE. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Content is front-loaded with the core action before the confirmation mechanics, and every sentence carries information. The confirmation sentence is dense and long, but it covers a non-obvious two-phase behavior that justifies the length.

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?

For a write tool with no output schema and no required parameters, the description covers the return value (fileId), the side effect (immediate co-parent visibility), and the full confirmation flow including the phase-1 preview response. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly on the first attempt.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100% and each parameter already documents its own role, including the path/url mutual exclusivity and confirmToken usage. The description restates the 'exactly one of path or url' rule and PDF-only constraint, adding emphasis but no new parameter meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (upload a PDF to OFW My Files) and its narrow purpose (for later attachment to an expense), which cleanly separates it from the generic sibling ofw_upload_attachment. An agent can tell what it does and where the resulting fileId goes without opening any schema.

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?

Gives the selection constraint explicitly (exactly one of path or url), the file restriction (PDF only), the confirmation protocol alternatives (elicitation vs two-step confirmToken), and cross-references ofw_create_expense for the separate privateExpense visibility decision. When and how to proceed is fully specified.

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