Skip to main content
Glama
cmeans

mcp-synology

photo_request

Destructive

Create, list, update, or delete Synology Photos upload links that let anyone with the link submit files into a chosen folder, with optional passphrase, expiry, and size limits.

Instructions

Manage Synology Photos photo requests: links that let anyone with the link upload files into one of your Photos folders. action: create (returns the link), list (every request with its passphrase and link), update, or delete (its link stops working).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
spaceNoLibrary of `folder`: `personal` (default) or `shared`.personal
actionYes`create` (`subject`, `folder`), `list`, `update` (the fields given) or `delete`.
folderNoThe existing folder uploads go into, as a path in `space` such as `/Inbox`; required for `create`.
expiresNoLink expiry: `YYYY-MM-DD` (end of that day, UTC), a date-time with offset (`2026-12-31T18:00-05:00`) or `never` (create's default).
requestNo`update`, `delete`: the request's passphrase from action=list.
subjectNoThe subject; required for `create`.
descriptionNoAn optional note.
max_file_mibNoLargest file accepted, in MiB; `0` (create's default): no limit.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.9.2

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description adds valuable operational context by defining the side effects of the actions (e.g., create returns the link, delete breaks it). While annotations cover the safety profile, this text clarifies the practical consequences of using the tool.

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 highly efficient. It is a single, well-structured paragraph that clearly explains the scope and all possible functional states of the resource.

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 high-quality input schema and clear behavioral hints, the description provides all necessary high-level context for an AI agent to select and correctly invoke the tool for CRUD operations.

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?

The schema coverage is 100%, so the structure of the parameters is fully documented. The description mainly summarizes the functionality rather than adding meaning to specific parameters like 'folder' or 'expires'.

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 immediately identifies the resource ('Synology Photos photo requests') and defines the management capabilities ('Manage... photo requests'), clearly distinguishing it from generic file upload/download tools.

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?

It provides explicit usage guidance by defining the outcomes of the `action` parameter: 'create' returns a link, 'delete' makes it stop working. This helps the agent select the right operational mode based on its goal.

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