GenFlick

Recover the original captured form change after interrupted apply

native.genads_recover_lead_form_change

DestructiveIdempotent

Recover the original captured form change after interrupted apply. Never calls Meta, creates a replacement, starts a missing readback or resumes a stopped request.

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_recover_lead_form_change"
  }
}

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

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description usefully adds that no Meta call is made and no replacement request is created. However, given destructiveHint=true, the description never says what state is overwritten or what happens to the current (partially applied) form change — the only mutation-relevant fact an agent needs. The 'never creates a replacement' line also reads closer to read-only than the annotations imply, though it does not directly contradict them.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and constrained by the negative list. Every clause carries information about scope; nothing is padded or repeated from the title.

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 no prose. But this is a destructive, multi-parameter recovery operation inside a session/workflow protocol, and the description never explains how to obtain the required work_id, operation_id or catalog version, nor what recovery actually restores. Adequate as a boundary statement, incomplete as operating guidance.

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?

Six parameters at roughly 50% schema description coverage, and the description mentions none of them. It gives no hint about work_id, arguments.operation_id, read_skills or expected_catalog_version, so it fails to compensate for the undocumented half of the schema. The schema does helpfully document read_skills and expected_catalog_version, but that credit belongs to the schema, not the description.

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: recover the original captured form change after an interrupted apply. The resource qualifier ('lead form change') distinguishes it from the many other recover_* siblings. It stops short of explicitly naming which sibling to use instead (e.g. genads_lead_form_result or genads_apply_catalog_sync), so the differentiation is implicit rather than stated.

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?

The phrase 'after interrupted apply' gives a concrete triggering condition, and the second sentence effectively excludes adjacent intents — do not use this to resume a stopped request, start a readback, or create a replacement. What is missing is a positive pointer to the tool that should be used for those excluded cases.

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?