Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Vidova

by ai.vidova
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Split a sound into its parts

split_sound

Split the sound of a video or a sound into its parts: voices (speech, singing, a crowd's chants), drums, bass, and other (everything else: instruments, ambience, a crowd's roar, effects). Each part you name comes back as a new sound asset, the whole source, in step with it from its first second. To use a part, put it on an audio track with the same at, offset and duration as the clip whose sound it stands in for, and set that clip's volume to 0; the parts you leave out are gone from that stretch. A part does not take a recorded song out: where read_asset lists recorded music in an asset's sound, the song's notes are in other and its singing in voices. It does not use credits.

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": {
      "assetId": "<assetId>",
      "parts": "<parts>",
      "projectId": "<projectId>"
    },
    "name": "split_sound"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
partsYesThe parts to make, each a new sound asset: voices (speech, singing, a crowd's chants), drums, bass, other (everything else: instruments, ambience, a crowd's roar, effects).
assetIdYesThe video or sound asset whose sound to split. Use the IDs search_assets gives.
projectIdYesThe project this call runs on without changing the open project. null (or leaving it out) uses the open project. wait_for_jobs takes the projectId of the calls that started the jobs.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent operation, but the description adds value beyond them: 'It does not use credits' (cost), the limitation that a recorded song is not extracted from read_asset music (with notes in 'other' and singing in 'voices'), and that each requested part becomes a new aligned sound asset.

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 and allowed parts are front-loaded, and most sentences carry distinct information (outputs, alignment, track usage, song caveat, credit cost). Some sentences are convoluted ('the clip whose sound it stands in for'), which slightly hurts readability.

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 no output schema, the description explains what is returned (new sound assets per named part) and how to use them, and covers cost and a key non-extraction limitation. It is nearly complete for a mutation tool, missing only details like idempotency or failure behavior.

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%, so the enum meanings for parts and the projectId/open-project behavior are already documented in the schema. The description largely restates that field information, so the baseline of 3 applies; the alignment detail ('in step from its first second') is about the output rather than a parameter.

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 ('Split the sound of a video or a sound into its parts') and enumerates the exact outputs (voices, drums, bass, other) with concrete examples for each. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like isolate_voice, which extract only a voice.

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 strong procedural guidance: how to place the resulting parts on an audio track with matching at/offset/duration and zero the source clip's volume, and warns that omitted parts disappear. It does not, however, name when to prefer this over alternatives such as isolate_voice, so sibling routing is left implicit.

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

All Vidova 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