Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Montik

by app.montik
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Set sections

set_sections

Name ranges of the timeline the way you and the person talk about the cut: Hook, Problem, Proof, CTA. A name that exists moves to the new range. Sections follow ripple cuts, and check_edit reports on each. Draft them from the transcript and the shots, then tell the person what you called them.

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": {
      "sections": "<sections>"
    },
    "name": "set_sections"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
replaceNodrop the existing sections first
sectionsYestimeline seconds
projectIdNoProject to act on (default: the open one)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), it discloses real behavior: an existing name moves to the new range, sections follow ripple cuts, and check_edit reports on each. That is meaningful context for a mutation tool, though it does not say what happens to overlapping or unnamed ranges.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action and concrete examples, with no filler. The conversational tone ('the way you and the person talk about the cut') costs a little density but aids intent.

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?

For a 3-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, rename behavior, ripple interaction, and verification via check_edit. Only edge cases like replace semantics and overlap handling are left to the schema.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds genuine meaning: 'A name that exists moves to the new range' explains the name/id matching semantics that the schema only hints at via the id field's 'to rename one' note.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: naming ranges of the timeline (sections) with examples like Hook, Problem, Proof, CTA. It is clearly distinct from list_sections and remove_sections, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It implies a workflow ('Draft them from the transcript and the shots, then tell the person what you called them') but gives no explicit when-to-use versus list_sections, remove_sections, or add_marker, and no exclusions or prerequisites.

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

All Montik 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