BlitzReels Video Editor

Add Media To Timeline

timeline_media_add

Place an uploaded image or video asset onto the actual BlitzReels project timeline at a timestamp. Use after media_upload_file when the user asks to add B-roll, a static image, or visual media to the video.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`assetId`	Yes	Image or video media asset ID. UUID string.
`projectId`	Yes	BlitzReels project ID. UUID string.
`layerIndex`	No	Exact timeline layer to use. Lower layer numbers render on top. Omit for intent-based placement.
`startSeconds`	No	Timeline start time in seconds
`allowDuplicate`	No	Allow inserting the same asset more than once
`positionPreset`	No	Visual placement preset	fullscreen
`animationPreset`	No	Optional visual animation preset	none
`durationSeconds`	No	Duration in seconds. Required for still images when a specific length is needed.
`placementIntent`	No	Layer intent used when layerIndex is omitted. Use overlay for visible B-roll/logo/sticker over video, background for behind video, exact when layerIndex is supplied.	overlay

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already signal readOnlyHint=false, and the description reinforces the mutating nature by saying 'Place' onto the 'actual' timeline. It adds useful workflow context ('Use after media_upload_file') and media-type nuance, but it does not disclose side effects on existing timeline items or layer conflicts beyond what the schema already implies.

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?

The description is very concise: two sentences, front-loaded with the action and object, and every phrase adds value. The second sentence provides essential usage context without waste.

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?

Given a 9-parameter schema that is fully described and an output schema, the description does not need to repeat internals. It covers core purpose and usage enough for an agent to select the tool, though it could mention layer/positioning semantics if the schema were less rich. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for the tool's complexity.

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%, with detailed descriptions for every parameter, including enums and defaults. The description adds no additional parameter guidance, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 description opens with a specific verb ('Place'), a resource ('actual BlitzReels project timeline'), and object ('uploaded image or video asset'), clearly indicating what the tool does. It distinguishes from siblings like media_upload_file and timeline_audio_add by specifying B-roll/static image/visual media and 'actual' timeline.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It explicitly states when to use: after media_upload_file and when the user wants to add B-roll, a static image, or visual media. It gives a clear workflow but does not explicitly name alternative tools or provide when-not-to-use guidance, so it stops short of a 5.

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

All BlitzReels Video Editor tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

Most tools use clear domain prefixes, but several boundaries are fuzzy: clips_get and clips_manage both expose clip/export status, and update_timeline_clip overlaps with timeline_edit_apply for trim/duration changes. Detailed descriptions mitigate this, but an agent could still select the wrong tool for clip inspection or timeline edits.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names are snake_case and mostly readable, but the server mixes verb-first names (add_text_overlay, delete_timeline_items, update_timeline_clip) with noun-first domain-action names (clips_create, generation_*_create, media_import_*). The domain-prefix pattern dominates, yet the inconsistent verb placement makes the convention only partially predictable.

Tool Count1/5

58 tools is far beyond the 25+ threshold and matches the rubric's 50+ extreme-mismatch example. Even though the domain is broad, this surface would be easier for an agent to navigate if split into focused servers for media, generation, timeline editing, clips, and workflows.

Completeness3/5

Core video-editing flows are well represented: project creation/inspection, timeline item editing/deletion, media import/upload, AI generation, exports, and clips. However, lifecycle gaps remain—no project update/delete, no media asset deletion, no delete for characters or story kits, and no export cancellation—so some user requests will dead-end.

Resources

Need Help?