Skip to main content
Glama

TeamShared

by io.github.xhad

Drive Upload Request

drive_upload_request

Deprecated alias for storage_upload_request.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
agentNoOverride agent identity
titleYesStorage object title
work_idNoAttach the uploaded Storage object to this work item UUID
filenameNoOptional local filename (script default path + MIME sniff)
parent_idNoFolder UUID to land the file in (omit or empty = org root). One grant per file.
project_idNoAttach the uploaded Storage object to this project UUID (kind=artifact)
content_typeNoOptional MIME type hint stored on the grant
upload_base_urlNoOptional server origin (e.g. https://teamshared.com). Defaults to settings.public_url.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / parent_id
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Folder UUID to land the file in (omit or empty = org root). One grant per file."
+}
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / project_id
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Attach the uploaded Storage object to this project UUID (kind=artifact)"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / title / description
      Previous value: -"Drive object title"New value: +"Storage object title"
    • addedInput schema / properties / work_id
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Attach the uploaded Storage object to this work item UUID"
+}
  3. Added

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It honestly discloses deprecation and equivalence to storage_upload_request, which is useful, but it does not describe the underlying upload behavior, side effects, or requirements such as authentication or storage object creation. Some transparency is present, but significant behavioral context is delegated to the canonical 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?

A single sentence that says exactly what is needed: the tool is deprecated and points to the canonical replacement. There is no wasted wording, and the critical deprecation signal is front-loaded.

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 deprecated alias, the description is sufficiently complete: it tells the agent not to use it and where to go instead. Full parameter documentation in the schema and an output schema cover the mechanics, so the only missing piece is the standalone behavioral description of the upload operation, which is reasonably delegated to storage_upload_request.

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 100%, so the input schema already documents all 8 parameters including defaults and semantics. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, which is acceptable under the baseline for full schema coverage.

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?

The description clearly identifies this as a deprecated alias for storage_upload_request, which tells an agent what this tool is and where the real functionality lives. It does not describe the upload action in its own words, but the alias reference makes the purpose unambiguous and distinct from the many storage/drive siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The word 'Deprecated' explicitly signals not to use this tool, and 'alias for storage_upload_request' names the exact alternative. This gives the agent an unambiguous routing decision with no need to infer when or whether to call it.

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

All TeamShared toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

With 104 tools across many domains (memory, work, projects, files, agents, context, strategic, ontology), the use of clear prefixes (memory_, work_, project_, file_, agent_run_, context_) makes most tools distinct. However, there are some potential confusions between memory_session_* vs memory_state_*, and memory_recall vs memory_think vs memory_assemble_context, though descriptions clarify their specific purposes. Aliases like memory_playbook_get for memory_procedure_get are explicit and reduce ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

Tool names follow a highly consistent pattern: prefix_domain_action (e.g., file_create, work_update, memory_recall, agent_run_start). All use snake_case, with verbs consistently placed after the domain prefix. Even less common tools like account_brief and attention_snapshot fit the overall naming scheme, making the set predictable and easy to navigate.

Tool Count3/5

At 104 tools, this is an exceptionally large surface area, far exceeding the 25+ threshold that feels heavy. However, the server covers an extensive domain (organizational memory, work management, project tracking, file sharing, agent orchestration, and strategic planning), which justifies a large count. Still, the sheer number may overwhelm agents, and some tools could be consolidated (e.g., many memory_session_* and memory_state_* variants).

Completeness4/5

The tool surface is remarkably complete for its stated purpose, covering CRUD operations for files, work items, projects, and memory, plus lifecycle management for agents, sessions, and strategic plans. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no direct memory_item_get by ID, no section removal in projects), but agents can work around these using existing tools like memory_recall or work_create with parent_id. Overall, the set minimizes dead ends.

Resources