Skip to main content
Glama
karbassi

slack-mcp

by karbassi

files_upload

Upload files to Slack channels, supporting binary uploads and text snippets with optional comments and thread replies.

Instructions

Upload a file (legacy).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleNoTitle of the file shown in Slack.
contentNoFile contents as a string; using this creates an editable text/snippet file instead of a binary upload.
channelsNoComma-separated list of channel IDs to share the file into (e.g. ``C0123,C0456``).
filenameNoName of the file (e.g. ``report.pdf``).
filetypeNoFile type identifier (e.g. ``python``, ``pdf``).
thread_tsNoTimestamp of the parent message to share the file into as a thread reply (e.g. ``1700000000.00``).
initial_commentNoMessage text to post alongside the file.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only says 'Upload a file', with no details on what happens (e.g., returns file object, side effects, authentication needs). This is minimal.

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?

Extremely concise at one short sentence. No wasted words, but could add a bit more context without losing conciseness (e.g., mention usage context).

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given 7 parameters and no annotations, the description is very incomplete. It doesn't mention output, prerequisites, file size limits, or that it's legacy. Inadequate for complex tool.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions for all 7 parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states 'Upload a file (legacy)', specifying the verb and resource. The '(legacy)' tag distinguishes it from newer versions like files_upload_v2, making purpose clear.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The 'legacy' tag implies preference for newer versions, but explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use is absent.

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/karbassi/slack-mcp'

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