Skip to main content
Glama

remix_find

Make it mine, for a long-form opening or a package: write up to n (1 to 5, default 3) new ones for your niche that keep one real find's structure. From a long find, written holds openings: hook (what the creator says first), then (what the next half minute has to deliver) and kept_structure, built on the find's template and its order of beats. From a packaging find it holds packages: title, thumbnail (what to show and how to frame it), thumbnail_text (the words to print, or null) and kept_structure, built on its title template and its thumbnail's composition.

Write my intro: with mode "intro" and video_brief (your own video in a few sentences,
10 to 600 characters; a long find only, a packaging find is 422; niche and n are not
used) it writes YOUR intro in the real opening's structure. `written` then holds one
object with a beat for each beat of the real opening, in order: beat, does, from_s,
to_s, seconds and words_budget (the real opening's own timing, never the model's), say
(the words to say, with {placeholders} for what only you know), words, placeholders,
suggested_on_screen and suggested_broll (suggestions, never part of what is said); and
seconds, timing (measured or estimated), kept_structure, placeholders and
numbers_to_placeholders. The answer carries mode "intro" and video_brief, and niche is
null. A number you did not write in video_brief becomes {number}. One that copies the
real opening or runs over a word budget is 422 remix_not_possible.

Returns {"find_id", "kind", "niche", "n", "written", "label", "credits_charged": 1,
"credits"}. label says they were written by Hook Detector from a real opening's (or
package's) structure: show it with them, never present one as a real video's. One that
is the real find's own words is dropped. They are never added to a run, a keep or an
export. Costs 1 credit per call, taken before the model is asked and refunded when it
does not answer (503 model_unavailable) or when nothing it wrote keeps the rules or it
declines the content (422 remix_not_possible, the reason in the message; another try
or another niche may work). 402 insufficient_credits at a balance of 0;
404 find_not_found; limited per account per hour (429 rate_limited). Needs the
research permission. The answer carries remix_id: list_remixes and get_remix read it
back, free. Same as POST /v1/finds/{find_id}/remix.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nNohow many to write, 1 to 5 (default 3)
modeNooptional: "openings" (the default) writes openings or packages for a niche; "intro" is Write my intro: your own timed intro for the video you describe in video_brief, in this long-form opening's structure. Only a long find has an intro (a packaging find is 422); niche and n are not used in intro mode
nicheNoyour niche, product or audience, as you would say it (1 to 120 characters)
api_keyNo
find_idNoone of your finds (from get_run, get_find, list_finds or list_kept_finds)
video_briefNorequired for mode "intro", 10 to 600 characters: what your video is about, in a few sentences, in your own words and language. The intro uses only the facts and numbers you write here; anything else becomes a {placeholder}
idempotency_keyNo1 to 255 visible ASCII characters; the same key and request within 24 hours answer the saved remix and charge nothing; the same key with another request is 422 idempotency_key_reused

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / mode
      Added value: +{
      +  "default": null,
      +  "description": "optional: \"openings\" (the default) writes openings or packages for a niche; \"intro\" is Write my intro: your own timed intro for the video you describe in video_brief, in this long-form opening's structure. Only a long find has an intro (a packaging find is 422); niche and n are not used in intro mode",
      +  "enum": [
      +    "openings",
      +    "intro",
      +    null
      +  ],
      +  "examples": [
      +    "intro"
      +  ],
      +  "title": "Mode",
      +  "type": [
      +    "string",
      +    "null"
      +  ]
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / video_brief
      Added value: +{
      +  "default": null,
      +  "description": "required for mode \"intro\", 10 to 600 characters: what your video is about, in a few sentences, in your own words and language. The intro uses only the facts and numbers you write here; anything else becomes a {placeholder}",
      +  "examples": [
      +    "A beginner video on why home espresso tastes sour, built around my 18 grams in, 36 grams out recipe."
      +  ],
      +  "maxLength": 600,
      +  "minLength": 10,
      +  "title": "Video Brief",
      +  "type": [
      +    "string",
      +    "null"
      +  ]
      +}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / idempotency_key
      Added value: +{
      +  "anyOf": [
      +    {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    }
      +  ],
      +  "default": null,
      +  "description": "1 to 255 visible ASCII characters; the same key and request within 24 hours answer the saved remix and charge nothing; the same key with another request is 422 idempotency_key_reused",
      +  "title": "Idempotency Key"
      +}
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly: 1 credit charged before the model runs and refunded on 503 or 422, 402/404/429 error conditions, hourly rate limit, required research permission, idempotency behavior, and the fact that remixes are never added to a run, keep or export. It even discloses that outputs are drop-filtered if they copy the real find's words.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is front-loaded with purpose but then unspools into long run-on sentences with inconsistent backtick formatting and no structure. A substantial portion enumerates the shape of `written` for each mode, which the output schema already covers, so not every sentence earns its place.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a 7-parameter, credit-consuming, permission-gated generation tool, the description covers cost, refunds, errors, permissions, rate limits, output label semantics and idempotency. With an output schema present, it correctly does not need to explain return values, and nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is high at 86%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning beyond the schema: in intro mode niche and n are unused, numbers not written in video_brief become {number} placeholders, and a copy or word-budget overrun yields 422 remix_not_possible. These are behavioral rules about how inputs are interpreted, not restatements of the schema.

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 opening states a specific verb and outcome: write up to n new openings/packages/intros for your niche that keep one real find's structure. That is distinguishable from short-form siblings like remix_hook and from find_long_hooks/find_packaging, though the comparison is left implicit. The cryptic phrasing 'Make it mine' adds noise before the actual purpose lands.

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?

It routes between the two modes clearly: 'openings' (default) writes openings or packages for a niche, while mode 'intro' writes your own timed intro and does not use niche or n. It also states the precondition that intro only works on a long find (a packaging find is 422). It never names sibling tools to use instead, so the boundary with remix_hook or find_long_hooks must be inferred.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources