Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
R2 Bucket MCP

R2 Bucket MCP

by ingsamcas
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

get_file

Retrieve any object from Cloudflare R2 storage by its key, obtaining a download URL or saving the file directly to a local path.

Instructions

Get/download an object from R2 by key. Returns downloadUrl (public CDN or presigned). Optionally saves to a local filePath on the MCP host. Global R2_KEY_PREFIX is applied if configured.

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": {
      "key": "<key>"
    },
    "name": "get_file"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYesObject key in the bucket (e.g. vitalo/2.1.0/app-release.apk)
filePathNoAbsolute local path to save the file. If omitted, only returns URLs and metadata.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, but description discloses key behaviors: returns downloadUrl, optional local save, global prefix application. Lacks details on error handling or authentication, but adequate for a read operation.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no redundant information.

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?

Covers core functionality and parameter semantics, but lacks details on return structure (e.g., metadata fields) and error scenarios. Adequate for a simple retrieval tool without output schema.

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 coverage is 100%, and description adds value by explaining the Optional filePath behavior and global prefix application, beyond what schema provides.

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 states the tool retrieves an object from R2 by key, distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_file, list_files, upload_apk, and upload_file which perform different operations.

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 implies usage for downloading objects, but does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives. However, sibling tool names are self-explanatory, providing sufficient 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