Skip to main content
Glama

clips_from_video

Find clips in a video AND cut up to 5 of them, under ONE payment. This is the alternative to calling find_clips and then clips_from_job yourself — prefer it whenever the user wants clips delivered end-to-end from a video they have not yet uploaded. CARD PAYMENT ONLY — this chain authorizes a Stripe hold (up to $4.50) before the final price is known (the total depends on how many clips are found and delivered), a shape MPP push settlement cannot express. A caller with no card-checkout capability (a wallet-only MPP agent) should NOT call this tool — call find_clips then clips_from_job instead, paying per step in USDC. Two-call flow: (1) call with filename and content_type (video only) — and an optional query to switch clip discovery from "best clips" to matching specific content (e.g. "the part about pricing") — to receive {job_id, status: "awaiting_payment", checkout_url}; (2) once the user says they have authorized payment, call again with the SAME job_id (no other fields needed) to recover state — this returns the same checkout_url if still unauthorized, or an upload step once the card hold is authorized (the client performs the upload, never you). Retrying with a NEW call instead of the same job_id authorizes a SECOND card hold for the same video — always resume with job_id, exactly like every other job-creating tool here. The card hold authorizes the worst case (one $2.00 find_clips analysis plus up to 5 × $0.50 clips), not a charge — the customer is charged once, at the end, for exactly what was delivered (fewer clips than the maximum is normal, not a failure). Clips are auto-selected by score and delivered as a clips-manifest output alongside the transcript and clip candidates on the same job. Poll with get_job_status(job_id) for the transcript and candidates; the clips themselves land as the job progresses through its chained stages. Set orientation to choose the shape: vertical (the default) cuts 9:16 clips for TikTok, Reels and Shorts; horizontal cuts 16:9 clips for YouTube or a website embed. horizontal CUTS the clips and hands them back — it does not upload or publish anything to YouTube; publishing is publish_to_youtube, a separate job the user has to ask for. Pick from what the user says they want the clips FOR, and if that is genuinely ambiguous, ask rather than guessing — the two produce different files at the same price. orientation: "vertical" clips are burned with word-level captions by default (center-third placement, uppercase, one short line per card); pass captions: false to render them without. orientation: "horizontal" clips never get captions.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryNo
job_idNo
captionsNo
filenameNo
job_typeYes
thread_idNo
orientationNo
content_typeNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / captions
      Added value: +{
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden — and it does: payment model (card-only, Stripe hold up to $4.50, charged once at the end), the two-call resume protocol, and the critical warning that re-calling without job_id authorizes a SECOND hold. It also discloses that horizontal does not publish (publishing is publish_to_youtube), preventing a realistic misuse.

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 routing lead the description, and nearly every sentence carries operational weight (payment shape, resume protocol, orientation choice). It is nonetheless a dense block that revisits the payment/retry theme more than once, so it is longer than strictly necessary.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description fills that gap: it describes the first-call return ({job_id, status: 'awaiting_payment', checkout_url}), the second-call return (checkout_url or upload step), and the final clips-manifest output alongside transcript and candidates. An agent has everything needed to drive the full chain.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0% across 8 parameters, so the description must compensate, and it explains most of them well: query (switches discovery to content matching), filename + content_type (video only), job_id (same-id resume semantics), orientation (vertical vs horizontal and their caption defaults), and captions. It gives no meaning for thread_id or for the job_type enum (clips_from_video vs clips_youtube), which the schema lists as required.

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?

The opening sentence states a specific verb and resource ('Find clips in a video AND cut up to 5 of them, under ONE payment') and immediately names itself as the alternative to the find_clips + clips_from_job sequence. An agent can distinguish it from both siblings 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 Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit when-to-use ('prefer it whenever the user wants clips delivered end-to-end from a video they have not yet uploaded'), explicit when-NOT ('a wallet-only MPP agent should NOT call this tool — call find_clips then clips_from_job instead'), plus a tie-break rule for the ambiguous orientation case. This is as complete as usage guidance gets.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources