GenFlick

Prepare a ZIP of the exact saved creative pack

native.genads_export_pack

DestructiveIdempotent

Prepare a ZIP of the exact saved creative pack. Costs 3 credits from the project's billing account and the accepted chat budget. The download is private to the requester. Reuse operation_id after an uncertain response; this never approves or launches ads.

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.genads_export_pack"
  }
}

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

B3.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description adds substantial context beyond the annotations: an exact cost of 3 credits, the billing pools it draws from (project billing account and accepted chat budget), and that the resulting download is private to the requester. The idempotentHint is reinforced by the operation_id reuse instruction, and "never approves or launches ads" usefully bounds the otherwise alarming destructiveHint=true. It does not explain why a ZIP preparation is flagged destructive, but that is a minor residual gap.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose before cost, privacy, and retry rules. Nothing is wasted, though the second and third sentences are terse assertions that could have been fused without loss.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and cost plus retry semantics are covered. For a six-parameter, nested-argument mutation that spends money and asserts a catalog version and skill proofs, the description still leaves an agent unsure about the prerequisites (quote first? saved revision fixed?) that determine whether the call succeeds.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 50%, so the description must carry weight it mostly does not. It illuminates operation_id (reuse semantics) and implicitly relates the 3-credit cost to max_credits, but work_id, request_key, expected_revision and the arguments envelope — including the fact that max_credits is a spend ceiling — get no treatment at all.

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 and resource ("Prepare a ZIP of the exact saved creative pack") that an agent can act on immediately. However, the sibling set contains native.genads_export, native.genads_pack_export, native.genads_quote_export and native.genads_stop_pack_export, and the description does none of the disambiguation between them that the name-to-name overlap makes necessary.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

There is real operational guidance: reuse operation_id after an uncertain response, and the tool never approves or launches ads. What is absent is when to reach for this instead of the quote/stop/export siblings — an agent seeing five export-adjacent names gets no routing rule.

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?