GenFlick

Read Workshop

get_workshop

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read one saved Character, Set, Prop, Clip, Writing, Model or 3D Scene Reference Workshop in its authorized native home. Use the exact canonical subject ID returned by Genflick; opener/navigation context grants no access. Retired scene subjects are refused, never translated into clip identities.

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": {
      "workspace_id": "<workspace_id>",
      "subject": "<subject>"
    },
    "name": "get_workshop"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`subject`	Yes	Canonical saved Workshop identity from Genflick. Clip and scene_reference address a Film clip through its native composite subject ID; writing addresses its saved document; model addresses an element. The retired scene kind is not accepted and must never be reinterpreted as a clip. IDs locate resources and never confer access.
`workspace_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile needs no restating. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: IDs locate resources but never confer access, opener/navigation context is not authorization, and retired scene kinds fail rather than being silently remapped. The failure mode for non-canonical IDs is implied but not spelled out.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the scope and kind enumeration, and the access caveat follows the identifier instruction it modifies. Dense jargon like 'authorized native home' costs a little clarity, but no sentence is filler.

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?

Only two parameters plus a nested subject, an output schema, and full annotation coverage, so the description carries little extra burden. It covers identity sourcing and access denial well; the only residual gap is workspace_id, and the return shape is already covered by the output schema.

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 coverage is 50%, with the nested subject object documented in-schema; the description reinforces that by defining what 'canonical subject ID' means and excluding the retired scene kind. However, workspace_id is undocumented in both the schema and the description, so the coverage gap is not compensated and the meaning of the subject ID's origin (Genflick) is stated in prose only.

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?

States a specific verb (Read) and resource (Workshop) and enumerates exactly which subject kinds are addressable, which lets an agent tell it apart from read_studio_document or native.read_element. It stops short of naming a sibling tool as the alternative path, so the differentiation is by resource type rather than explicit routing.

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?

Gives a clear precondition ('Use the exact canonical subject ID returned by Genflick') and an explicit when-not ('Retired scene subjects are refused, never translated into clip identities'). What is missing is direction to an alternative tool when the caller has only a navigation context or a non-canonical ID.

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

All GenFlick 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?