Tomorrow Lives Engines

Check a shot

raster_check

Read-onlyIdempotent

Checks a shot document with the renderer's strict reader: its name, size, subject count and length, or the key that is wrong and why. Forms and materials are named by shipped id or written inline. Costs no units.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`shot`	Yes	A shot document written inline: a camera, the sun and air, and subjects. raster_schema lists every key.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ms`	No	Milliseconds the run took.
`job`	Yes	The job id; the job tool reads it.
`verb`	No	The tool that made it.
`files`	No	Files made, each with a name, type, size and a signed URL.
`units`	No	Units this call cost.
`result`	No	The engine's own answer, a JSON document.
`status`	No	queued when the job runs in the background.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 14, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "files": {
+      "description": "Files made, each with a name, type, size and a signed URL.",
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": {},
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "job": {
+      "description": "The job id; the job tool reads it.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "ms": {
+      "description": "Milliseconds the run took.",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "result": {
+      "description": "The engine's own answer, a JSON document."
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "description": "queued when the job runs in the background.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "units": {
+      "description": "Units this call cost.",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "verb": {
+      "description": "The tool that made it.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "job"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedOct 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the safe read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world profile, so the bar is lower. The description still adds real value beyond that: it flags the 'strict reader' behavior, notes the operation costs no units, and characterizes the verdict (valid fields vs. the offending key and reason).

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no filler. Slightly dense but every clause carries information; nothing is wasted.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be re-explained, and the description still summarizes the verdict shape. For a single-param validation tool it covers what is checked, the reference conventions, and the cost, leaving little an agent needs 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?

With 100% schema coverage the baseline is 3, but the description goes further by clarifying that forms and materials may be referenced either by shipped id or written inline, which is not stated in the schema. The nested shot object is also routed to raster_schema for every key.

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 ('Checks') and resource ('a shot document') and enumerates what is validated (name, size, subject count, length) plus the failure mode ('the key that is wrong and why'). This clearly separates it from raster_render (which renders) and raster_schema (which lists keys).

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied – validate a shot document via the strict reader, and it 'costs no units' – but the description never names alternatives like raster_render or raster_schema or states when-not to use it. An agent must infer the validate-before-render workflow.

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

All Tomorrow Lives Engines 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?