Skip to main content
Glama
thenavidm

Gumloop MCP Server

by thenavidm
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Upload multiple files

upload_files
Destructive

Upload multiple files to a Gumloop account, user, or project; confirmation is required before this account operation runs.

Instructions

Upload multiple files Explicit confirmation is required for this exact account operation. Runs can spend credits or trigger downstream actions; never resubmit unknown outcomes automatically.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filesNo
accountNoNamed private Gumloop account; selects private credentials and user/team identity.
confirmNoSet true only when the user asked for exactly this action.
payloadNoComplete JSON request body instead of body flags. Preserves current endpoint fields and values.
user_idNoThe user ID associated with the files. Required if project_id is not provided.
project_idNoThe project ID associated with the files. Required if user_id is not provided.
payload_fileNoRegular local JSON body file, at most 5 MB. Cannot be mixed with body flags or payload.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed8 schema fields changedv3.0.0
    • addedInput schema / $defs / files
      Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "properties": {
+      "file_content": {
+        "description": "Base64 encoded content of the file.",
+        "format": "byte",
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "file_name": {
+        "description": "The name of the file to be uploaded.",
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / confirm / description
      Previous value: -"Must be true for this exact requested account change, agent/flow execution, upload or deletion."New value: +"Set true only when the user asked for exactly this action."
    • addedInput schema / properties / files / $ref
      Added value: +"#/$defs/files"
    • removedInput schema / properties / files / items
      Removed value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "file_content": {
-      "description": "Base64 encoded content of the file.",
-      "format": "byte",
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "file_name": {
-      "description": "The name of the file to be uploaded.",
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "type": "object"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / files / type
      Removed value: -"array"
    • addedInput schema / properties / payload / properties / files / $ref
      Added value: +"#/$defs/files"
    • removedInput schema / properties / payload / properties / files / items
      Removed value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "file_content": {
-      "description": "Base64 encoded content of the file.",
-      "format": "byte",
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "file_name": {
-      "description": "The name of the file to be uploaded.",
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "type": "object"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / payload / properties / files / type
      Removed value: -"array"
  2. First observedv2.0.1

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, openWorldHint=true, readOnlyHint=false. The description adds value beyond these by naming the concrete stakes ('runs can spend credits or trigger downstream actions') and the non-idempotency consequence ('never resubmit unknown outcomes automatically'), which explains WHY it is non-idempotent rather than just declaring it.

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?

The title line is repeated before the substantive guidance, which is slight redundancy, but the body is three front-loaded sentences with no filler. The key safety constraints (confirmation, no auto-resubmit) lead the content.

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 7-param, nested, destructive, non-idempotent mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the two highest-risk behaviors (confirmation gating and non-resubmission). It does not explain return values or the payload vs. body-flags selection, but annotations plus rich schema cover most remaining ground.

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 coverage is 86%, so the schema already documents files, account, confirm, user_id/project_id, and payload. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning (e.g., the user_id vs project_id mutual requirement, or the payload/payload_file mutual exclusivity) beyond what the schema says. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Upload multiple files'), which clearly distinguishes it from the singular sibling upload_file and from upload_session_file/upload_brain_files. However, it doesn't clarify the target scope (e.g., account-level files vs. session/project files) beyond what the schema reveals.

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?

Provides a warning about resubmission ('never resubmit unknown outcomes automatically') and confirmation requirement, which implies caution-oriented usage. But it never names an alternative sibling (upload_file, upload_session_file) or states when this batch tool is preferable to the single-file variant.

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