GenFlick

replace document body

replace_studio_document_body

DestructiveIdempotent

Replace the complete current body. The saved text is authoritative immediately and its diff remains reviewable. Read the complete document before a whole-body rewrite. Use workspace_id from the authorized Film, Series or GenAds directory. Reuse request_key only for the same exact 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": {
      "document_id": "<document_id>",
      "expected_revision": "<expected_revision>",
      "body": "<body>",
      "workspace_id": "<workspace_id>",
      "request_key": "<request_key>"
    },
    "name": "replace_studio_document_body"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`body`	Yes	Complete requested document body
`season_id`	No
`document_id`	Yes
`request_key`	Yes
`workspace_id`	Yes
`expected_revision`	Yes	Copy the exact revision returned for this same resource. Never invent a hash or reuse another resource's revision. Obtain current passage evidence before editing.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds genuine context beyond that: the write is authoritative immediately, the prior text stays reviewable as a diff, and request_key scopes replay to an identical request.

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, each carrying distinct operational information, with the core action and its immediate-commit semantics front-loaded. The telegraphic style is dense but nothing is redundant.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a destructive whole-body mutation with six parameters, the description covers the essentials: read-before-write, workspace provenance, idempotency key discipline, and the fact that the diff stays reviewable. An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation; only document_id/season_id scoping is left implicit.

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?

With schema coverage at 33%, the schema documents only body and expected_revision, so the description must compensate. It usefully explains where workspace_id comes from and the idempotency contract for request_key, but document_id and season_id remain undocumented in both places.

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?

"Replace the complete current body" names a specific verb and resource, and the phrase "whole-body rewrite" implicitly separates it from the incremental siblings apply_studio_document_edits and replace_studio_document_text. It never names those siblings directly, so an agent must infer the boundary rather than read it.

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?

Gives real preconditions: read the complete document first, take workspace_id from the authorized Film, Series or GenAds directory, and reuse request_key only for the same exact request. It stops short of explicit when-not-to-use routing against the partial-edit siblings, which is the main remaining gap.

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?