Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Panda Video

by com.pandavideo
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List AI Works

panda_list_ai_works
Read-onlyIdempotent

List the account's AI works (subtitles, translations, dubbing, lipsync, eBook=ABSTRACT, mind map=MINDMAP, quiz=QUESTIONS) page by page, newest first, with status (QUEUE, RUNNING, FINISHED, ERROR, SKIPPED). Only the latest attempt of each video × type × language. Filters: status, updated_since, video_id, folder_id (the API doesn't filter by type). Read-only. Returns {works: [{id, video_id, type, status, from_lang, to_lang, credits_charged, created_at, updated_at}], page, pages, total}.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "panda_list_ai_works"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoPage (default 1)
limitNoPer page, 1–50 (default 25)
statusNoOnly these statuses
video_idNoOnly this video
folder_idNoOnly this folder
updated_sinceNoOnly works updated since this ISO date/time, e.g. '2026-10-01T00:00:00Z'

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld/non-destructive, so safety is covered; the description adds non-obvious behavior: newest-first ordering, latest-attempt-only deduplication across video × type × language, pagination, and the absence of type filtering. No rate-limit or auth notes, but nothing contradicts the annotations.

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 purpose and scope, dense but every clause carries information (type mapping, dedup rule, filters, return shape). Slightly overpacked into one run-on sentence, which costs a point on scannability.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by spelling out the return object fields, page/pages/total pagination, and the status enum. Combined with the disclosed ordering and dedup semantics, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret it correctly.

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 100%, so baseline is 3; the description goes slightly beyond by listing which filters actually exist and flagging that `type` is not filterable despite types being returned. It does not add format or interaction detail for parameters the schema already describes (e.g. multi-value status behavior).

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?

Specific verb + resource ('List the account's AI works') with an explicit enumeration of what counts as an AI work and the API-level type mapping (eBook=ABSTRACT, mind map=MINDMAP, quiz=QUESTIONS). Ordering ('newest first') and dedup scope ('only the latest attempt of each video × type × language') make it unambiguous which of the many list_* siblings this is.

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 the usable filter set (status, updated_since, video_id, folder_id) and warns 'the API doesn't filter by type', which preempts a likely wrong call. It does not name a sibling to use instead for related questions (e.g. folder-level AI status or per-video AI resources), so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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

All Panda Video 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