Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
immich-photo-manager

immich-photo-manager

by drolosoft
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Search large assets

search_large_assets
Read-only

List the largest files in your Immich library, sorted by size, to identify what consumes storage before a cleanup. Filter by minimum megabytes or asset type; read-only.

Instructions

The biggest files in the library, largest first. Use this to find what is eating storage before a cleanup — videos and originals show up immediately. Read-only.

Args:
    min_size_mb: Only assets at least this many megabytes (0 = no minimum).
    size: How many assets to return (1-200, default 20).
    asset_type: 'IMAGE' or 'VIDEO'. Omit for both.

Returns: JSON with total and an assets array of {asset_id, filename, size_mb,
date}, largest first.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sizeNo
asset_typeNo
min_size_mbNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv2.0.2

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/destructiveHint, so the closing 'Read-only' adds nothing; credit goes to the non-annotation facts the description does supply — result ordering (largest first), that videos/originals surface immediately, and the 1-200 result cap.

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 purpose and followed by a compact Args/Returns block; the only waste is the redundant 'Read-only.' sentence, which the annotations already state.

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 simple, zero-required-parameter read tool with annotations covering safety and an output schema covering the return shape, the description supplies everything an agent needs: when to use it, what it returns, and the meaning of every parameter.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden and does: it explains min_size_mb semantics (0 = no minimum), the size range and default (1-200, default 20), and the accepted asset_type values with the omit-for-both rule.

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 combines a concrete verb, resource and ordering ('biggest files in the library, largest first') with a stated intent ('find what is eating storage before a cleanup'), which is specific enough to separate it from list_assets and the other search_* siblings.

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 gives a clear when-to-use scenario (pre-cleanup storage triage) but names no alternative tools — an agent is not told to prefer get_duplicates for duplicates or list_assets for unfiltered browsing.

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