Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

GenFlick

by com.genflick
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Price saved media files against their exact prompts, settings and reviewed references

native.genads_quote_generation
DestructiveIdempotent

Price saved media files against their exact prompts, settings and reviewed references. Returns fingerprints and revisions for deliberate generation.

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_quote_generation"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
work_idYes
argumentsYes
read_skillsYesExact 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_keyYes
publication_proposal_idNoFor native Social scheduling, the exact server-approved publication proposal. This identifier cannot confer approval by itself.
expected_catalog_versionYesFor 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

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, yet the description reads like a read-style pricing call that merely 'returns' data and never discloses what is created, mutated, or destroyed. It adds no context about the record written, idempotency behavior via request_key, or the referenced session/skill proof requirements. The one useful nuance is that it returns both fingerprints and revisions, hinting the result is meant to be persisted.

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?

Two tight sentences with the core action front-loaded and no filler. Structure is clear, though the brevity veers into under-specification for a tool with six parameters and a destructive hint.

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

Completeness2/5

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

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not required, but the description leaves major gaps for a six-parameter, session-bound, destructive-hinted tool: what a 'quote' represents, when publication_proposal_id applies, and why the operation is not read-only. An agent could not safely invoke this from the description alone.

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 50%: read_skills, expected_catalog_version, and publication_proposal_id are already documented in the schema, while work_id, arguments.media_ids, and request_key are bare. The description's mention of 'exact prompts, settings and reviewed references' loosely maps to the reference inputs but gives no guidance on work_id scoping, media_ids limits, or request_key reuse.

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?

The description gives a specific verb and resource: 'Price saved media files against their exact prompts, settings and reviewed references.' It also names the output artifacts ('fingerprints and revisions'), which helps an agent understand this is a pre-generation costing step. It does not differentiate itself from sibling quote tools such as native.genads_quote_export or native.quote_film_clip_sound_removal, so it stops short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The only usage signal is the trailing phrase 'for deliberate generation', which vaguely implies pricing precedes a generation run. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative among the several quote_* siblings. An agent must infer the routing decision entirely.

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

All GenFlick toolsInspect
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