Skip to main content
Glama

PrePublish - YouTube script QA

by ai.prepublish
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Collect a Prepublish audit by id

get_audit
Read-only

Fetch the current state of an audit that was started earlier, using the analysis_id that audit_script returned. Use this when a previous audit was still running, or when the user refers back to an audit from earlier in the conversation. It performs no new analysis and costs nothing. This is a text-only check of an unrecorded script. It maps relative attention risk inside the draft. It does not measure or predict published YouTube retention, and it cannot account for delivery, editing, thumbnail, topic or distribution.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
analysis_idYesThe analysis_id returned by audit_script.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noticeYesThe scope limit that accompanies every Prepublish result. Repeat it to the user rather than dropping it.
analysisNoThe audit at whatever state it has reached: read its "status" field first, because an audit that has not settled carries no scores. Once settled it carries the projected report described on audit_script, and an audit that failed carries its error_message.
unlock_urlNoPresent only when part of this result is locked on the caller's plan: where the user pays to unlock it. Absent when nothing is locked.
analysis_idYesThe id that was requested, echoed back.
unlock_offerNoPresent with unlock_url: the one sentence to relay when offering it.
open_in_browserYesPermalink to the same audit on prepublish.ai.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / unlock_offer
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Present with unlock_url: the one sentence to relay when offering it.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / unlock_url
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Present only when part of this result is locked on the caller's plan: where the user pays to unlock it. Absent when nothing is locked.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / analysis / description
      Previous value: -"The audit as Prepublish returned it, at whatever state it has reached. Read its \"status\" field: an audit that is not yet settled has no scores."New value: +"The audit at whatever state it has reached: read its \"status\" field first, because an audit that has not settled carries no scores. Once settled it carries the projected report described on audit_script, and an audit that failed carries its error_message."
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "analysis": {
+      "description": "The audit as Prepublish returned it, at whatever state it has reached. Read its \"status\" field: an audit that is not yet settled has no scores.",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "analysis_id": {
+      "description": "The id that was requested, echoed back.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "notice": {
+      "description": "The scope limit that accompanies every Prepublish result. Repeat it to the user rather than dropping it.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "open_in_browser": {
+      "description": "Permalink to the same audit on prepublish.ai.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "notice",
+    "analysis_id",
+    "open_in_browser"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnly, non-destructive, closed-world), and the description adds substantial scope detail beyond them: no new analysis, zero cost, no persistence ('unrecorded script'), plus an explicit list of what it cannot measure (published retention, delivery, editing, thumbnail, topic, distribution). This is exactly the limitation disclosure an agent needs to avoid misusing the result.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first clause, and the cost/limitation sentences each carry real decision value. The trailing enumeration of six things it can't account for is somewhat list-heavy, but not wasteful for a tool where over-trusting the result is the main risk.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and annotations carry the safety profile. The description supplies the remaining gaps: provenance of the id, when to call it, cost, and the full boundary of what the audit does and does not cover.

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% and the single parameter is already documented as 'The analysis_id returned by audit_script.' The description restates that provenance but adds no format, constraint, or failure-mode detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('Fetch the current state of an audit') plus the retrieval key, and it explicitly scopes the operation as a lookup of an audit 'started earlier' rather than a new run. 'This is a text-only check of an unrecorded script' further pins down what the resource actually is.

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?

Names two concrete triggers: 'when a previous audit was still running' and 'when the user refers back to an audit from earlier in the conversation.' It also implies the exclusion ('performs no new analysis', id comes from audit_script), though it never explicitly says to use audit_script instead when starting fresh.

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

All PrePublish - YouTube script QA toolsInspect
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.

Resources