Skip to main content
Glama

Create a storyboard

create_storyboard

Make a film three ways: from a brief you have written as scenes, from media the account already holds, or from a video you have already analysed. Scenes are written in order and chained in one write, so a twelve-beat board arrives as one video path rather than twelve calls. Anything you leave out of a scene is filled in: the description and the image prompt fall back to the title, and an unwritten motion prompt gets a subtle drift. Cast members are named, not referenced — the names of Subjects the account holds, which list_subjects finds. settings applies to written scenes and from_analysis; a film made from_media takes its frame from the first file, so set its settings with edit_storyboard afterwards. A style is looked up before anything is made, and a name that misses makes nothing. Nothing here spends credits. For written scenes, attach owned footage with edit_storyboard's set_scene_clip, or use generate_scene_images when new stills are needed. Add a voice-over or music with edit_storyboard's add_sound before rendering.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
castNo
nameNo
scenesNo
settingsNo
from_mediaNo
from_analysisNoBuild the board from a video you read with get_video_analysis_bundle and wrote a beat sheet for with save_video_analysis. One scene per beat, with its title, its intent, its prompts and its MEASURED length — never re-type a beat sheet as scenes, because the arithmetic is ours and a board written by hand remembers no source, which is what match_scene_motion needs. The prompts arrive written for a different subject, as the beat sheet wrote them: transpose them in one edit_storyboard afterwards.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
castYes
briefYes
notesYes
quoteNo
textsYes
scenesYes
soundsYes
videosYes
creditsYes
historyYes
messageYes
skippedNo
startedNo
stoppedNo
acceptedNo
receiptsNo
scheduleYes
settingsYes
referenceNo
storyboardYes
download_urlNo
generation_idNo
remaining_scenesNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / settings / properties / default_image_model / enum
      Previous value: -[
      -  "seedream-5-lite",
      -  "nano-banana-2.1",
      -  "nano-banana-2",
      -  "gpt-image-2.5-flare",
      -  "gpt-image-2.5-sunburst",
      -  "gpt-image-2",
      -  "nano-banana-2-lite",
      -  "seedream-5-pro",
      -  "seedream-5-pro-spicy",
      -  "flux-schnell",
      -  "flux-2-flex",
      -  "flux-2-pro",
      -  "flux-2-max",
      -  "recraft-v4.1-svg",
      -  "recraft-v4.1-pro-svg",
      -  "p-image",
      -  "grok-imagine-image",
      -  "grok-imagine-image-quality",
      -  "soul-2"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "seedream-5-lite",
      +  "nano-banana-2.1",
      +  "nano-banana-2",
      +  "gpt-image-2.5-flare",
      +  "gpt-image-2.5-sunburst",
      +  "gpt-image-2",
      +  "nano-banana-2-lite",
      +  "seedream-5-pro",
      +  "seedream-5-pro-spicy",
      +  "flux-schnell",
      +  "flux-2-flex",
      +  "flux-2-pro",
      +  "flux-2-max",
      +  "recraft-v4.1-svg",
      +  "recraft-v4.1-pro-svg",
      +  "p-image",
      +  "grok-imagine-image",
      +  "grok-imagine-image-quality",
      +  "krea-3",
      +  "qwen-image-3-pro",
      +  "soul-2"
      +]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only give the generic profile (non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent), but the description adds substantive behavior: omitted scene fields fall back to the title and a subtle motion drift, a style name that misses produces nothing, `from_media` fixes the frame from the first file, multi-scene boards are committed in a single write, and no credits are spent at this step.

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?

Front-loaded with the three usage modes, then dense routing and fallback rules with almost no filler; the literary opening phrase is the only mildly rhetorical sentence. Backticked parameter names keep it scannable despite the length.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need no explanation, and the description covers mode selection, fallbacks, credit behavior, and the downstream render/edit steps. It omits operational bounds (60-scene and 250-item caps) and any permission or prerequisite notes, but nothing critical for correct invocation 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 description coverage is low (17%), so the description must carry the load, and it does for the mode parameters: cast values are subject names, scenes are written in order and chained, settings scope applies only to written scenes and analysis, and from_media semantics are clarified. It does not explain per-scene fields such as hold_motion, duration_seconds bounds, or the item limits, which remain schema-only.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb and resource and enumerates the three distinct creation modes (written scenes, existing media, prior analysis), which an agent can immediately map to the `scenes`, `from_media`, and `from_analysis` parameters. It also contrasts itself with edit_storyboard, generate_scene_images, and apply_storyboard_template, so it is distinguishable from siblings.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly routes the agent: use set_scene_clip on edit_storyboard for owned footage, generate_scene_images for new stills, add_sound for voice-over/music before rendering, and list_subjects to resolve cast names. It also states the condition under which settings must be applied later via edit_storyboard for `from_media` boards.

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