Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
webex-mcp

webex-mcp

by yuryev89
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

webex_get_file_details

Retrieve file attachment metadata—filename, content type, and size—from a Webex message file URL without downloading the body.

Instructions

Get attachment metadata (filename, content type, size); no body.

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": {
      "fileUrl": "<fileUrl>"
    },
    "name": "webex_get_file_details"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fileUrlYesMessage files[] contents URL

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'Get' implies a read-only operation and 'no body' usefully discloses that content is not returned, which is real behavioral value. However, it omits error behavior for invalid/missing URLs and any permission requirements.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words; the returned fields and the key scoping constraint both land immediately.

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 one-parameter read tool with fully documented schema this is nearly sufficient. The remaining gap is minor: without an output schema the description could confirm the exact return shape, but the field list already approximates it.

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% and the single fileUrl parameter is documented as 'Message files[] contents URL', so the schema already does the work. The description adds no format or extraction guidance beyond what is structured.

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 (get attachment metadata) and enumerates the returned fields (filename, content type, size). The 'no body' clause distinguishes it from a raw content fetch, though it does not explicitly name webex_download_file as the alternative.

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 'no body' note hints that this is the metadata-only path versus downloading content, but usage is left implicit. It never says to use webex_download_file when the actual file bytes are needed, nor any precondition on the fileUrl.

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