CueFrame

Refresh Render Url

refresh_render_url

Idempotent

Re-sign a COMPLETE render's output URL. A render's presigned MP4 link lasts ~7 days, so wait_job / getRender on an old render hands back a link that 403s; this mints a fresh one for the same file and returns { outputUrl, outputExpiresAt }. Needs projectId + renderId (from create_render). 422 render_not_complete while the render is still running or failed — wait_job for it first. Requires renders:write (the row's stored URL is updated).

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`renderId`	Yes	renderId (path).
`commandId`	No	Retry identity. A call repeated with the same commandId returns the first result instead of acting twice.
`projectId`	Yes	projectId (path).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`outputUrl`	No
`outputExpiresAt`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed5 schema fields changedOct 28, 2026
- addedInput schema / $defs
```
Added value: +{
+  "__schema0": {
+    "maxLength": 128,
+    "minLength": 1,
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+}
```
- addedInput schema / properties / commandId / $ref
```
Added value: +"#/$defs/__schema0"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / commandId / maxLength
```
Removed value: -128
```
- removedInput schema / properties / commandId / minLength
```
Removed value: -1
```
- removedInput schema / properties / commandId / type
```
Removed value: -"string"
```

Changed1 schema field changedOct 22, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / commandId

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Retry identity. A call repeated with the same commandId returns the first result instead of acting twice.",
+  "maxLength": 128,
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}

AddedOct 18, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false), and the description adds real context beyond that: the ~7-day expiry, the exact error code and its cause, the required scope renders:write, and the notable side effect that the row's stored URL is updated. That side-effect disclosure is the kind of thing annotations alone would not convey.

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?

Four tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action before rationale, preconditions, and permissions. Nothing is padding; the parenthetical "(the row's stored URL is updated)" earns its place as a mutation disclosure.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a narrow single-purpose minting tool, everything an agent needs is present: when to call, preconditions, error semantics, auth scope, and side effects. Return values are also restated, which is mildly redundant given the output schema exists, but it does not hurt completeness.

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%, so projectId, renderId and commandId are already documented in the schema, and commandId's retry-identity semantics live there too. The description only adds provenance for the two required params ("from create_render"), so the baseline 3 is right.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ("Re-sign a COMPLETE render's output URL") and scopes it with the emphasized COMPLETE, which immediately differentiates it from get_render/wait_job. An agent can tell exactly what this tool does and what it does not do.

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?

Explicitly says when to reach for it (an old render's ~7-day presigned MP4 link 403s) and names the alternatives it supersedes (wait_job / getRender hand back a stale link). It also gives a precondition: 422 render_not_complete while running or failed, so "wait_job for it first."

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

All CueFrame tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.