Skip to main content
Glama
g-digital-by-Garrigues

GoCertius MCP Server

Official

evidence_upload

Uploads a local file as evidence by computing SHA-256, registering internal custody evidence, and uploading bytes to S3 in one step. Requires case and evidence group IDs, and file path or base64 content.

Instructions

Uploads a local file as evidence in one step: computes its SHA-256, registers the evidence record (custodyType INTERNAL = GoCertius stores the file), and uploads the bytes to S3 — no manual hashing or PUT needed. Internally this follows the required GoCertius sequence: create INTERNAL evidence → receive uploadFileUrl (presigned S3 URL) → PUT file bytes → return uploaded:true. Requires: case_file_create → caseFileId, evidence_group_create → evidenceGroupId. Provide EXACTLY ONE of filePath (absolute local path, stdio/local mode only) or contentBase64 (base64-encoded file content, ~10 MB max). Use evidence_upload when the file is on the local machine; use evidence_create when you already have the SHA-256 hash, need to inspect/use uploadFileUrl manually, or have a public fileUrl. After this tool succeeds, verify with evidence_get/evidence_list and only then call evidence_seal. If this tool fails before returning an evidence id, check evidence_list before retrying; if retrying manually, use evidence_create with a fresh UUID. Local files must be under 1 GiB.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleYesHuman-readable title for the evidence
fileNameYesFile name including extension
filePathNoAbsolute local path to the file (stdio/local mode only). The tool will create evidence, receive uploadFileUrl, and PUT this file to it.
caseFileIdYesUUID of the case file
contentBase64NoBase64-encoded file content (~10 MB max). The tool will create evidence, receive uploadFileUrl, and PUT these bytes to it.
evidenceGroupIdYesUUID of the evidence group
Behavior5/5

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

Description details internal sequence: create INTERNAL evidence, receive presigned URL, PUT file bytes, return uploaded:true. Also mentions file size limits (10 MB base64, 1 GiB local). Annotations set readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, which are not contradicted. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond 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?

The description is thorough but slightly verbose. It front-loads the main purpose and every sentence adds value. Minor structural improvements could make it more scannable, but it remains effective and not excessively long.

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 tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description is exceptionally complete. It covers internal workflow, prerequisites, file size limits, failure recovery, and proper usage sequence. No output schema, but description mentions return of 'uploaded:true' and references sibling tools for verification.

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 coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions. The description adds critical guidance: 'Provide EXACTLY ONE of filePath or contentBase64', explains filePath is for stdio/local mode, and clarifies the relationship between parameters. This significantly aids correct invocation.

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 clearly states the tool uploads a local file as evidence in one step, computing SHA-256, registering the evidence record, and uploading to S3. It distinguishes from sibling tool evidence_create by specifying that evidence_upload is for local files while evidence_create is for manual hashing or public URLs.

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?

Explicitly states when to use this tool vs alternatives: 'Use evidence_upload when the file is on the local machine; use evidence_create when you already have the SHA-256 hash, need to inspect/use uploadFileUrl manually, or have a public fileUrl.' Also provides prerequisites (case_file_create and evidence_group_create) and post-success steps.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/g-digital-by-Garrigues/GoCertius_MCP'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server