GenFlick

Adjust 3D clips

native.edit_film_three_d_clip

DestructiveIdempotent

Change which part of the 3D cut clips use, their guide look, or the moment a single-image guide shows. Give range in cut-clock frames (from read_film_three_d), or edit_ids to use whole consecutive shot uses. The clip's length follows its range. A range longer than the clip's video model can follow is refused with the limit. reference_frame null resets the moment to the middle of the range. Renders the changed guides (no credits); the clip's existing image and video were made from the earlier 3D. Never regenerates.

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": {
      "work_id": "<work_id>",
      "arguments": "<arguments>",
      "expected_catalog_version": "<expected_catalog_version>",
      "read_skills": "<read_skills>",
      "request_key": "<request_key>"
    },
    "name": "native.edit_film_three_d_clip"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`work_id`	Yes
`arguments`	Yes
`read_skills`	Yes	Exact required native skills and their dependencies, copied from the accepted session bootstrap's skills array. Include only entries in that array. General mcp.* guides and native.{studio}.instructions are guidance, not native skill proofs.
`request_key`	Yes
`publication_proposal_id`	No	For native Social scheduling, the exact server-approved publication proposal. This identifier cannot confer approval by itself.
`expected_catalog_version`	Yes	For a new session, read a studios/{studio}/native/{pack} child toolset and copy invocation.catalog_version from a native tool descriptor. Do not use the top-level library version. For calls in an existing session, use that session proposal's catalog_version.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations (destructive=false, idempotent=true, readOnly=false), the description discloses that out-of-range values are clamped with a warning, that lighting applies scene-wide, and that changes are saved to the draft without re-rendering or regeneration. That is meaningful behavior an agent could not infer from the structured fields, though it does not spell out required permissions or what the response contains.

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?

The content is front-loaded with purpose followed by usage, then behavioral caveats. Sentences are dense and purposeful, though the paragraph packs several distinct concerns together without visual separation.

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?

For a complex 6-parameter nested tool with 50% schema coverage and no output explanation needed (output schema exists), the description covers the behavioral essentials well. The remaining gap is the unaddressed expected_revision parameter, which matters for a draft-persisting edit.

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?

The description clarifies the critical choice between 'time_range (seconds)' and 'shot_ids', that duration follows the in/out range, and the clamping semantics — real meaning beyond the 50%-covered schema. It remains silent on expected_revision and work_id scoping, so it doesn't fully compensate for the coverage gap.

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 and three precisely named sub-resources ('window into its source, camera framing, or lighting'), which lets an agent tell this apart from adjacent edit tools without opening the 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?

It explicitly routes between alternatives — 'Use edit_film_camera for camera-only changes, edit_film_lighting for lighting-only changes' — and clarifies that this persists to the current draft rather than triggering a render, which is a strong when-to-use condition.

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?