Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Mondovo

by com.mondovo.app
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Approve or redraw a film's look sheet

answer_studio_video_look_sheet

When get_studio_video shows look_sheet with approved: false, show the user the picture at look_sheet.url (the people, place and style every scene is filmed to) and send their answer: approved: true when it is right, or notes saying what to change (it is drawn again with everything said so far). Free — the film is priced and bought later, as always.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
notesNoWhat to change about it
approvedNotrue: the look sheet is right
user_goalNoOptional: the user's goal behind this call, in one short sentence of plain words (e.g. "add a page so customers can book tables"). No names, emails or other personal details.
project_idYesProject id from create_motion_project. The bare project id or the library id ("studio-video:<uuid>" from list_creations / find_creation) both work.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / user_goal
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional: the user's goal behind this call, in one short sentence of plain words (e.g. \"add a page so customers can book tables\"). No names, emails or other personal details.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / project_id / description
      Previous value: -"Project id from create_motion_project"New value: +"Project id from create_motion_project. The bare project id or the library id (\"studio-video:<uuid>\" from list_creations / find_creation) both work."
    • removedInput schema / properties / project_id / format
      Removed value: -"uuid"
    • addedInput schema / properties / project_id / pattern
      Added value: +"^(?:studio-video:)?[0-9a-f]{8}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{4}-[0-9a-f]{12}$"
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent mutation, and the description adds real context beyond them: the redraw is free, regenerated from accumulated notes, and pricing/buying happens later. It does not state what happens after approval (next pipeline stage) or that a repeated notes call redraws again, but the safety and cost profile is well covered.

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?

A single tight paragraph that front-loads the trigger condition, then the user action, then the two response branches, then the cost note. Every clause carries information the agent needs; there is no filler.

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 4-param approval tool with no output schema, the definition covers trigger, user-facing step (show the picture), the two possible responses, the redraw consequence, and the cost framing. Nothing essential to calling it correctly is missing.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces the `approved` vs `notes` semantics and the cumulative-redraw meaning of notes, which is a small value-add, but it never mentions `user_goal` or the `project_id` format — baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the load.

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 action (approve or send notes to redraw) on a specific resource (the film's look sheet) and anchors it to the `look_sheet.approved: false` signal from get_studio_video. An agent can distinguish this from approve_studio_video_plan or edit_studio_video_storyboard without opening either schema.

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 names the triggering condition (get_studio_video shows look_sheet with approved: false) and the two branches: `approved: true` when it is right, `notes` when it needs redrawing. It also clarifies the redraw path reuses everything said so far, so the agent knows repeat notes calls are cumulative rather than a fresh start.

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

All Mondovo toolsInspect
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