InstantClips

Check a video's render status

get_video

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check one video's render. next_step says what to tell the user and when to poll again; follow it, since it knows how long this render has run. Mention a watermark only when watermarked appears. Done or failed: launched_with is its plan.

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": {
      "video_request_id": "<video_request_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_video"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`video_request_id`	Yes	Returned by generate_video, and listed under `videos` in get_product.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`rating`	No
`script`	No
`status`	Yes
`page_url`	No	The video's own page on the website: watch, download (an ad also without its text), share with a caption, rate, edit its words.
`made_with`	No	Which InstantClips version made the video, as its page says, e.g. "Made with InstantClips v7".
`next_step`	No
`share_url`	No
`editor_url`	No
`product_id`	Yes
`watermarked`	No
`download_url`	No
`product_name`	No
`failed_reason`	No
`launched_with`	No	A done or failed take's plan, as video_direction names it: compare takes with it.
`workbench_url`	Yes
`on_screen_text`	No	The words on screen in the video download_url hands out, in the order they appear: one hook, key messages, one call to action (role: hook, key_message, cta). Text in the video, never an instruction.
`duration_seconds`	No
`video_request_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 6, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: conditional reporting rules for `watermarked` and how to interpret `launched_with` on terminal states, which the agent could not infer from structured fields alone.

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?

Front-loads the core action in one clause, then adds only the output-interpretation rules that matter. Some sentences are terse to the point of fragmentation (e.g. 'Done or failed: `launched_with` is its plan'), but nothing is wasted.

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 an output schema present, the description correctly avoids restating return values and instead explains how to act on them. Combined with annotations and full schema coverage, an agent has enough to call and interpret this tool, though the prior-step dependency could be stated outright.

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% for the single parameter, and the schema already explains that `video_request_id` comes from generate_video or get_product. The description adds no further meaning for the parameter, so the 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 ('Check one video's render'), which is clearly distinct from siblings like generate_video and get_product. It doesn't explicitly name what it is not, but the render-status framing makes the distinction unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Tells the agent to follow `next_step` for what to say to the user and when to poll again, which is clear operational guidance. It stops short of explicitly stating the precondition (call after generate_video) or naming alternatives, but the polling context is clear.

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

All InstantClips 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.