AskEditor

Finish file upload

complete_upload

[write] Assemble an upload's parts into a library file, measure it, and optionally place it on the timeline. Use after every part of a create_upload has been PUT; pass each part's ETag exactly as returned, and over MCP the project's project_id. place lays it like add_timeline_clip. Not for a web address (use import_media_from_url). Returns asset_id, kind, name, duration_ms, width, height, and placed {handle, lane, start_ms, end_ms} when placed. Related: create_upload, add_timeline_clip, list_media.

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": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>",
      "upload_id": "<upload_id>",
      "parts": "<parts>"
    },
    "name": "complete_upload"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`parts`	Yes	Every part sent, with its ETag.
`place`	No	Also lay it on this project's timeline.
`upload_id`	Yes	upload_id from create_upload.
`project_id`	Yes	The AskEditor project this acts on (from list_projects).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare write, non-idempotent, non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered; the description goes further by disclosing the ordering precondition, the exact-ETag requirement, and the return payload (asset_id, kind, duration_ms, width, height, placed). It does not say what happens on a failed assembly (whether the upload is consumed or retryable) or note any size/duration limits on the assembled file.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and scope, then preconditions, then the return shape, then related tools -- a logical order with no filler. It is dense to the point of being terse in places ("over MCP the project's project_id" is elliptical), but every clause carries information.

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?

For a write tool with nested parts, an optional placement sub-object, and no output schema, the description covers the prerequisite, the required data fidelity, the branch to the URL-import sibling, and enumerates the return fields including the conditional placed object. Nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.

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; the description earns above that by adding cross-parameter meaning the schema lacks -- ETags must be passed exactly as returned, project_id must be supplied on MCP calls, and place behaves like add_timeline_clip. The nested place object's track/startMs/durationMs semantics are left to the schema, which already documents them.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource: "Assemble an upload's parts into a library file, measure it, and optionally place it on the timeline." It explicitly separates itself from import_media_from_url (web address) and create_upload (the preceding step), so an agent can pick it out of a 43-tool sibling list without opening a 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?

States the trigger condition precisely -- "Use after every part of a create_upload has been PUT" -- and names the exclusion with the alternative: "Not for a web address (use import_media_from_url)." It also cross-references the sibling whose behavior the place option mirrors (add_timeline_clip).

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

All AskEditor 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?