Wistia MCP Server

Create Folder

create_folder

Destructive

Creates a new Wistia folder to organize media, with options for public access, personal library, and administrator assignment.

Instructions

Creates a new folder (previously called project). If the folder is created successfully the Location HTTP header will point to the new folder.

Requires api token with one of the following permissions

Read, update & delete anything

Tokens with the "Act with a team member's permissions" permission (all:delegate_to_contact_permissions scope) can also be used. Requests made with such a token are authorized using the permissions of the contact assigned to the token.

An expiring access token created with the all:delegate_to_contact_permissions scope and an account authorization granting the create-folders permission can also be used. The folder's creator is the contact behind the token (the account owner for a token minted from an account-level token); adminEmail selects the folder's administrator (defaults to the account owner). personalLibrary creates the folder inside the My Library of the contact behind the token. The new folder is not covered by the token that created it, so follow-up requests need a token whose authorizations name the returned hashed id. Requires confirm=true for the requested mutation. May share access, notify people or incur provider charges.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	The name of the folder you want to create.
`public`	No	A flag indicating whether or not the folder is enabled for public access.
`account`	No	Named private Wistia account; selects credentials, not a remote account ID.
`confirm`	No	Must be true for the specific user-requested write.
`payload`	No	Complete JSON request body instead of body flags. Supports current nested customization, caption and nullable values.
`adminEmail`	No	The email address of the person you want to set as the owner of this folder. Defaults to the Wistia Account Owner.
`description`	No	The folder’s description.
`payload_file`	No	Regular local JSON body file, at most 5 MB. Cannot be mixed with body flags or payload.
`personalLibrary`	No	When true, creates the folder inside the requesting user's personal "My Library" (owned by them) instead of a shared account folder.
`anonymousCanUpload`	No	Whether anonymous users can upload media to the folder.
`anonymousCanDownload`	No	Whether anonymous users can download media from the folder.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.0Oct 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Far exceeds the annotations (destructiveHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint). It discloses the Location header on success, the confirm=true requirement, that the creating token does not cover the new folder so follow-ups need a token naming the hashed id, and that the call may share access, notify people or incur provider charges. This is exactly the behavioral context an agent needs for a mutation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The core purpose is front-loaded in one sentence, but the remainder is a dense, lengthy auth block with idiosyncratic formatting that is hard to scan. A fair amount of it is necessary for a tool with this many token variants, but the structure is heavy relative to the operation being performed.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly states the success signal (Location HTTP header pointing to the new folder) and covers the confirm requirement and follow-up token constraint. It is close to complete, though it does not describe error behavior or the relationship to subfolder creation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: what determines the folder's creator, how adminEmail selects the administrator and defaults to the account owner, and what personalLibrary does to ownership. It clarifies the semantics behind parameters rather than repeating the schema.

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?

Specific verb+resource with a useful disambiguation note that folders were previously called projects, which helps separate this from create_subfolder and create_channel in a crowded sibling set. An agent knows exactly what is created.

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 goes deep on auth prerequisites (which token scopes and permissions are required, how delegated tokens behave), which is genuinely useful gating context, but it never states when to prefer this tool over siblings like create_subfolder or create_channel. Usage is implied through the permission details rather than contrasted with alternatives.

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

Deploy Server