Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

GenFlick

by com.genflick
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

inspect saved tracking

native.genads_read_track
DestructiveIdempotent

Read bounded measured samples and loss coverage for one saved track.

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_read_track"
  }
}

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

C2.3/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

The description frames the operation purely as a read ("Read bounded measured samples..."), while the annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true. That is a direct inconsistency in the tool's safety profile, and the description never hints at any mutating or destructive side effect, nor at what a failed read costs. No credit for disclosing the open-world or idempotent traits either.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition, which is good structure. It is arguably under-specified rather than over-long, but nothing in it fails to earn its place.

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?

For a 6-parameter, nested-schema tool with session-versioning and skill-proof requirements, one sentence is far from enough. The output schema does cover return values, but prerequisites, track lookup, and the discrepancy between the read framing and the destructive annotation are all unaddressed.

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 only 50% and the description adds no parameter meaning at all. It implies an identifier for "one saved track" but does not explain how trackId, edit_id, sourceId and revision combine, nor what work_id, request_key, or the required read_skills proofs are for. Half the parameters remain undocumented in both places.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"Read bounded measured samples and loss coverage for one saved track" does give a verb and a resource, but the terms "bounded measured samples" and "loss coverage" are domain jargon and the scope of "one saved track" is never tied to a parameter or an ID. Siblings such as native.genads_read_measurement, native.genads_read_report and native.genads_track_target are not mentioned, so an agent cannot tell from the text which of these reading tools to pick.

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?

There is no when-to-use statement, no when-not-to-use, and no alternative named. Nothing tells the agent that a track must already be saved (presumably via a sibling like native.genads_track_target or native.genads_select_take) before this read makes sense, nor what state the session must be in.

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