Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@ffmpeg-micro/mcp-server

@ffmpeg-micro/mcp-server

by ffmpeg-micro
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Request Upload URL

request_upload_url

Request a presigned URL to upload file bytes via PUT. After successful upload, call confirm_upload to receive the final storage URL.

Instructions

Step 1 of the direct-upload flow. Returns a short-lived presigned HTTPS URL that the caller PUTs the file bytes to (with the same Content-Type that was passed in). After the PUT succeeds, call confirm_upload with the same filename and fileSize to receive the final gs:// URL for use as a transcode/transcribe input. The presigned URL expires in ~15 minutes.

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": {
      "filename": "<filename>",
      "contentType": "<contentType>",
      "fileSize": "<fileSize>"
    },
    "name": "request_upload_url"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fileSizeYesFile size in bytes (positive integer). Max 1.9GB.
filenameYesOriginal filename, e.g. 'webinar.m4a'. Used as the suffix of the storage object name.
contentTypeYesMIME type of the file (e.g. 'audio/mp4', 'video/mp4', 'image/png'). Must be a supported media type.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Without annotations, description discloses key behaviors: short-lived presigned URL, PUT requirement with same Content-Type, expiry time. Could note error states but adequate.

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?

Two sentences, no fluff, logically structured steps. Every sentence adds value.

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

Completeness4/5

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

No output schema, but description explains return type (presigned URL) and next step. Could specify exact return format but sufficient for the tool's simplicity.

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?

Schema has 100% description coverage; description adds context: filename as suffix, fileSize max 1.9GB, contentType must match PUT. Adds value beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly identifies the tool as 'Step 1 of the direct-upload flow' returning a presigned URL, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'confirm_upload'.

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?

Description explains the workflow (this step, then PUT, then confirm_upload) and mentions the URL expiry (~15 min), giving clear usage context.

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