ftp-mcp

ftp_upload

Uploads a local file to a remote server over FTP/FTPS/SFTP. Specify connection, local and remote paths, and optional transfer mode to complete the transfer.

Instructions

Upload a local file to the remote server

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": {
      "connection": "<connection>",
      "localPath": "<localPath>",
      "remotePath": "<remotePath>"
    },
    "name": "ftp_upload"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`mode`	No	Transfer mode (default: auto)
`localPath`	Yes	Local file path
`connection`	Yes	Connection name
`remotePath`	Yes	Remote destination path

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 9, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It indicates a mutating operation but doesn't disclose overwrite behavior, directory creation, error handling, or required connection state. The simple 'upload' statement lacks behavioral context.

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?

A single clear sentence, front-loads the action and resource, no wasted words.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple upload operation, the description states the essential purpose, but with no output schema or annotations, it fails to clarify return values, side effects, or usage context among the many sibling FTP tools.

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 covers 100% of parameters, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides for localPath, remotePath, connection, and mode.

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 uses the verb 'Upload' and specifies the resource ('local file') and destination ('remote server'), making it distinct from sibling tools like ftp_upload_directory.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., active connection) or exclusions (e.g., use ftp_upload_directory for folders).

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