AskEditor

Render motion graphic

render_asset

[generate · costs credits] Render one motion graphic to a file (an overlay as alpha WebM and a ProRes .mov, full-frame as MP4) with a still; costs credits, so only when asked. Use only when the person wants the file; the editor's preview does not need it. On failure, fix the code with write_asset and render again. Not for many at once (use render_all_assets). Returns asset (with status) and videoUrl. Related: write_asset, review_asset, render_all_assets. Full docs: load_skill with tools: [name].

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>"
    },
    "name": "render_asset"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`items`	No	Many graphics at once, max 12, each with this tool's fields; fields beside it are defaults.
`assetId`	No	Motion graphic id from list_assets.
`project_id`	Yes	The AskEditor project this acts on (from list_projects).
`approval_id`	No	Only when a previous call answered needs_approval: the approval_id it gave. Call again with it as soon as you have told the person where to approve: the call waits for their answer.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing the credit cost, the exact file formats produced, and the write_asset retry loop on failure, plus the return shape (asset with status and videoUrl). It does not address whether a re-run is safe or costly again despite idempotentHint=false, which is the one behavioral gap for a credit-spending operation.

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-loads the cost warning and output formats before the usage rules, and every clause carries information. It is a densely packed single block though, with related-tools and docs-pointer clauses competing for attention against the operational guidance.

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?

With no output schema, the description still names the return values (asset with status, videoUrl), covers cost, failure recovery, alternatives, and points to load_skill for deeper docs. An agent has everything it needs to invoke this correctly and interpret the result.

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 assetId, project_id, approval_id, and items are already documented; the description only implies the batch field via the render_all_assets contrast. Per the baseline for full coverage, a 3 is appropriate — it adds no syntax or format meaning beyond the schema.

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 ('Render one motion graphic to a file') and immediately enumerates the concrete outputs (alpha WebM overlay, ProRes .mov, MP4 full-frame) plus the still. The single-asset scope plus the explicit 'Not for many at once (use render_all_assets)' cleanly separates it from its batch sibling.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use ('only when the person wants the file'), when-not ('the editor's preview does not need it'), an explicit exclusion routing to render_all_assets, and a recovery path ('fix the code with write_asset and render again'). Nothing about tool selection is left to inference.

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?