Bisque Presentations

Get presentation status

get_presentation_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch the build state and result URL for a presentationId.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`presentationId`	Yes	The presentationId returned by create_presentation or publish_narrated_presentation.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ready`	Yes	True once the presentation is viewable.
`webUrl`	No	Shareable watch URL.
`narration`	No	Narration progress: status (complete \| partial \| failed \| waiting \| …) and per-slide errors when partial/failed. waiting = the rest of the audio is still coming; the slides are viewable and it lands without another call.
`visibility`	No
`keptVersion`	No	Set when the latest republish failed (publishStatus failed) and the presentation still plays this earlier version at webUrl.
`publishStatus`	Yes
`presentationId`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 7, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / keptVersion

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Set when the latest republish failed (publishStatus failed) and the presentation still plays this earlier version at webUrl.",
+  "type": "integer"
+}

changedOutput schema / properties / narration / description

Previous value: -"Narration progress: status (complete | partial | failed | …) and per-slide errors when partial/failed."New value: +"Narration progress: status (complete | partial | failed | waiting | …) and per-slide errors when partial/failed. waiting = the rest of the audio is still coming; the slides are viewable and it lands without another call."

Changed1 schema field changedSep 2, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / presentationId / description

Added value: +"The presentationId returned by create_presentation or publish_narrated_presentation."

First observedSep 1, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the response includes a result URL, but says nothing about terminal vs in-progress states, polling cadence, or failure behavior for an async build.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource and the returned fields come first.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the one parameter is fully documented. The only gap is guidance on polling/when to call it, which is minor for this simple status reader.

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 parameter description even names the producing tools, so the description's mention of 'a presentationId' adds nothing new. Baseline 3 is correct when the schema does the work.

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?

Names a specific verb ('Fetch') and a specific resource ('build state and result URL') scoped to a presentationId. It distinguishes itself well enough from generic readers, but does not explicitly contrast with close siblings like get_presentation_spec or get_presentation_analytics.

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?

Usage is only implied: 'build state' suggests polling after an async creation, and the schema note referencing create_presentation / publish_narrated_presentation reinforces that, but the description never states when to call it or that polling is the intended pattern.

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

All Bisque Presentations 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?