Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mixcloud-mcp

mixcloud-mcp

by nelsonra
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Hybrid

upload_cloudcast

Upload a recording to Mixcloud by selecting a file and optionally specifying a show title.

Instructions

Upload a recording to Mixcloud. Opens a file picker UI.

Args: name: Optional mix or show title to pre-fill in the upload form.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "upload_cloudcast"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions that a file picker UI opens, but does not specify whether the operation is synchronous, requires prior authentication, what it returns, or how the upload is completed. This is insufficient for a write tool.

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 compact and front-loaded: it states the core action first, then only one additional parameter explanation. 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?

The tool is simple with one optional parameter, and the description covers the purpose and param semantics. However, it lacks operational context such as whether the tool blocks awaiting user input, how the upload is completed, or any permissions required. The presence of an output schema offsets the need for return-value details, so this is incomplete but not fatally so.

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?

The description provides a clear explanation of the 'name' parameter as an optional pre-fill for the upload form, which the schema entirely lacks. This fully compensates for the 0% schema coverage.

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's action: 'Upload a recording to Mixcloud.' The verb 'upload' and resource 'Mixcloud' are specific, and the mention of opening a file picker UI distinguishes it from the read-only sibling tools like search_cloudcasts and get_cloudcast.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies this is the upload tool since all siblings are read operations, but it does not explicitly state when to use it or provide exclusions or prerequisites. The file picker mention hints that it requires user interaction but does not specify when an agent should invoke it.

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