ncloud-mcp-server

ncloud_list_multipart_uploads

Read-only

List in-progress multipart uploads for a bucket. Filter results by key prefix or use a delimiter to group uploads by path.

Instructions

List in-progress multipart uploads for a bucket

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>"
    },
    "name": "ncloud_list_multipart_uploads"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`prefix`	No	Limits results to uploads for keys beginning with this prefix
`delimiter`	No	Delimiter for grouping keys (commonly '/')
`bucketName`	Yes	Name of the bucket

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.10.1Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description aligns with that by using 'List'. It adds context about 'in-progress' uploads, which is useful behavioral information beyond the annotation, but does not disclose details like pagination, response format, or default limits.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the core action. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 list tool with full schema coverage and a read-only annotation, the description is mostly adequate. However, since there is no output schema, a brief note on the returned fields (e.g., upload ID, key, initiation time) would have made it more complete for an agent parsing results.

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 coverage is 100%, with each parameter (prefix, delimiter, bucketName) having clear descriptions. The tool description does not add parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('in-progress multipart uploads') and scope ('for a bucket'), making its purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ncloud_list_objects, ncloud_list_parts, and ncloud_initiate_multipart_upload by specifying 'in-progress multipart uploads'.

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?

The description clearly implies when to use the tool: when you need to see ongoing multipart uploads for a bucket. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for a listing operation.

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

Deploy Server