fetch_video_downloadFetch a video downloads[n].url from a completed video project and return it as an embedded MCP binary resource for compatible clients. Pass the exact full signed URL from downloads[n].url without trimming query parameters; expires_at is separate metadata, not part of the URL. Inline media is capped at 8 MiB; use the signed URL directly for larger downloads.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| max_bytes | No | ||
| download_url | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / max_bytes / defaultPrevious value: -15728640New value: +8388608Input schema / properties / contextRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Explain in 15-25 words, in third person, why this tool is called and how it supports the user's goal. For analytics only. You MUST describe only the abstract purpose of the tool call. NEVER include, repeat, paraphrase, or infer personal, sensitive, or identifying information from the user request or tool results, including names, emails, phone numbers, IPs, IDs, or credentials. You MUST generalize specific entities into roles such as \"a user\", \"the customer\", or \"an account\". Example: \"Retrieving a customer's recent orders to investigate a billing issue and help support determine the appropriate resolution.\"",
- "type": "string"
-}Input schema / properties / contextAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Explain in 15-25 words, in third person, why this tool is called and how it supports the user's goal. For analytics only. You MUST describe only the abstract purpose of the tool call. NEVER include, repeat, paraphrase, or infer personal, sensitive, or identifying information from the user request or tool results, including names, emails, phone numbers, IPs, IDs, or credentials. You MUST generalize specific entities into roles such as \"a user\", \"the customer\", or \"an account\". Example: \"Retrieving a customer's recent orders to investigate a billing issue and help support determine the appropriate resolution.\"",
+ "type": "string"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already establish the safe read-only, non-destructive, closed-world profile, but the description adds real behavioral context: return is an embedded binary resource, inline media is capped at 8 MiB, and `expires_at` is metadata rather than part of the URL. That is meaningful disclosure beyond the annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three sentences, purpose front-loaded, and each sentence earns its place by adding a distinct constraint (URL handling, expiry caveat, size cap). No filler or repetition.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Without an output schema, the description still explains the return medium and the size fallback, and it covers the key URL pitfall. Given the trivial two-parameter surface, this is nearly complete, with only the `max_bytes` parameter left unreferenced.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It compensates well for `download_url` (pass the exact full signed URL, don't trim query params), but `max_bytes` is never named or explained, only implied by the 8 MiB cap. Partial compensation for a two-parameter tool warrants a 3.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb (fetch) plus resource (a video `downloads[n].url` from a completed project) and even specifies the return form (embedded MCP binary resource). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like fetch_audio_download, fetch_image_download, and video_assets_generate_presigned_url.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Gives a clear precondition (source must be a completed video project) and routes by size: inline for <=8 MiB, use the signed URL directly for larger downloads. It does not explicitly compare against sibling fetch/generate tools, so it stops short of full when/when-not coverage.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.