framesail

View image

view_image

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch a rendered Framesail image so you (and your user) can SEE it — pass a URL from get_segment_assets, get_style, or asset endpoints. Returns the image inline. Only Framesail media URLs are allowed.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	Yes	Public Framesail media URL to fetch — a public_url from get_segment_assets, a file_path from list_assets, or a template/preset image URL from get_style / list_style_presets; other hosts are rejected

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already define the tool as read-only and idempotent. The description adds that the image is returned inline and only Framesail URLs are allowed, which is useful but not providing significant behavioral insight beyond what annotations convey.

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 extremely concise—two sentences that pack essential information: purpose, input source, output format, and restriction. No unnecessary words.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description fully covers what the tool does, what input it accepts, and what to expect as output. No gaps remain.

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?

The schema already has 100% coverage for the single parameter with a detailed description. The description repeats this information without adding new meaning, so it meets the baseline of 3.

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 clearly states the tool fetches a rendered Framesail image for visual inspection, distinguishing it from sibling tools that generate URLs (e.g., get_segment_assets) by specifying it accepts those URLs and returns the image inline.

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 the tool (after obtaining a URL from specific endpoints) and restricts usage to Framesail media URLs, providing clear context. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the restriction implicitly excludes other URL types.

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

All framesail 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

A3.6/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

Several tool families overlap in purpose, such as await_jobs/get_workflow_status/get_pipeline_progress, update_segment_content/update_segment_prompts, director_note/project_director_note, and scan_script/rescan_voice_blocks. The descriptions do a good job distinguishing them, but an agent must read carefully to avoid misselection, and there are more than a couple of confusable pairs.

Naming Consistency4/5

The set overwhelmingly follows a verb_noun snake_case convention with clear prefixes like get_, list_, set_, update_, create_, and delete_. Minor exceptions such as director_note, project_director_note, browse_audio_library, and whoami keep it from being perfectly consistent.

Tool Count1/5

At 72 tools, this is far beyond the 50+ extreme range and creates a heavy navigation burden for an agent. Even though the pipeline is complex, this many tools is not well-scoped for an MCP surface.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers the full script-to-export pipeline: styles, assets, voices, storyboards, segments, scenes, and rendering all have substantial lifecycle support. Some gaps exist—no delete_channel, delete_segment, delete_voice_block, or delete_provider_key—but most missing operations can be worked around through existing tools.

Resources

Need Help?