Revid

Get edit job

get_edit_job

Read-only

Follow a background edit edit_project started (a motion graphic rebuild, a generated clip). Waits up to 40 seconds per call; returns status running, applied or failed. A rebuild comes back with sourceChanges, the lines it changed: check they all belong to the request. Do not start the edit again while it runs: that charges again.

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": {
      "jobId": "<jobId>"
    },
    "name": "get_edit_job"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`jobId`	Yes	The jobId edit_project returned.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ok`	Yes
`data`	No
`error`	No
`method`	Yes
`status`	Yes
`endpoint`	Yes
`retryAfterSeconds`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: it discloses the blocking wait (up to 40 seconds per call), the exact status vocabulary (running, applied, failed), the shape of a rebuild result (sourceChanges with the lines changed), and a billing hazard for redundant edit_project calls. The readOnlyHint and destructiveHint=false annotations are consistent with a pure polling tool, and the description adds real operational context on top.

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?

Four tight sentences, front-loaded with what is being followed and what a call returns. Minor wording stumbles ('edit edit_project') but no sentence is filler; the cost warning is placed where it will be read.

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?

An output schema exists, so return structure needn't be explained, yet the description still flags the status values and the sourceChanges field an agent must validate. For a single-parameter polling tool this covers everything needed to call it and interpret the result correctly.

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% and the single jobId parameter is already documented as 'The jobId edit_project returned'. The description only reinforces that provenance ('Follow a background edit ... edit_project started') without adding format, lifetime, or reuse semantics for the ID.

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 and resource ('Follow a background edit edit_project started') and explicitly scopes it to jobs produced by the sibling tool edit_project, naming the job kinds (motion graphic rebuild, generated clip). An agent can distinguish it from get_export_status, get_media_status or get_project_status without opening any schema.

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?

Gives a clear operating rule — do not re-invoke edit_project while the job runs, because that charges again — which is exactly the mistake an agent would otherwise make. It does not spell out the polling loop (call repeatedly until status is applied or failed), though 'waits up to 40 seconds per call' implies it.

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

All Revid 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.

Resources

Need Help?