GenFlick

read element final prompt

native.read_element_final_prompt

DestructiveIdempotent

Read an image, audio or video file's saved source, constructed Final prompt, current edit, references and revision. Documents and other files have saved content instead of generation prompts. The resolved finalText includes saved creator edits applied to current construction.

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.read_element_final_prompt"
  }
}

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

C2.8/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, yet the description calls this a plain 'Read' with no mention of any side effect, write, or destructive consequence. The agent is given no explanation of what gets destroyed or why a read would be non-read-only, so the description actively conflicts with the structured safety data.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the action and the returned fields, with no filler. The phrasing 'constructed Final prompt' and 'saved creator edits applied to current construction' is slightly opaque, but the structure is efficient.

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 needn't be spelled out, and the description correctly signals that documents return saved content instead of prompts. However, for a tool annotated as non-read-only, destructive and idempotent, the complete absence of any behavioral explanation leaves a significant gap.

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?

At 50% schema description coverage, the description contributes nothing about work_id, arguments (element_id/file_id), or request_key. The read_skills, publication_proposal_id and expected_catalog_version parameters already have detailed schema descriptions, so the description adds no meaning beyond the schema and leaves the undocumented half undocumented.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('Read an image, audio or video file's saved source, constructed Final prompt, current edit, references and revision'), which tells the agent exactly what data comes back. It does not differentiate itself from close siblings such as native.read_element, native.read_film_studio_final_prompt or native.save_element_final_prompt, so the agent must infer scope from the name.

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?

Usage is only implied: the media-type scoping clause ('Documents and other files have saved content instead of generation prompts') tells the agent which element kinds this applies to, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative to read from or write to the final prompt.

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?