Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Google Cloud MCP Server

Google Cloud MCP Server

by iamishaan24
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Upload Static Site HTML

upload-static-site-html

Upload HTML content to a Cloud Storage bucket and set it as publicly readable, so you can host a static website directly from Google Cloud.

Instructions

Upload an HTML file to Cloud Storage and make it publicly readable.

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": {
      "bucketName": "<bucketName>",
      "htmlContent": "<htmlContent>"
    },
    "name": "upload-static-site-html"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fileNameNoFile name (default index.html)index.html
bucketNameYesBucket name
htmlContentYesHTML content to upload

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.5.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior, and it does call out the important side effect that the file is made publicly readable. However, it does not mention overwrite behavior for an existing fileName, required permissions, or what the tool returns.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to the core purpose and the key side effect.

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?

For a simple three-parameter upload tool, the description plus complete schema coverage gives an agent enough information to invoke it correctly. It could mention overwrite behavior or the returned public URL, but the essentials are present.

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 has a meaningful description. The tool description adds no extra parameter context beyond what the schema already provides, so the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly identifies the action (upload an HTML file to Cloud Storage) and the outcome (make it publicly readable). It is unambiguous about the core operation, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like deploy-static-site-from-html.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool instead of related siblings such as deploy-static-site-from-html or create-static-site-bucket. The description implies a simple standalone upload but does not state prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative conditions.

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