Skip to main content
Glama

Re-author with the LLM (paid)

author_op
Destructive

Runs ONE edit op that re-authors with the LLM — the SAME op the human director runs from the chat — and stages its result into the project's conversation draft, which becomes a new version when it is committed. The call waits up to 60 s for the pass (50 of the 58 authoring turns measured finished within that) and answers with the staged edit (outcome: completed_inline); a longer pass keeps running and the answer is its job (outcome: still_running, runId), which the project status reports by run_id. An identical call while the job runs, or within 15 minutes after it succeeded, returns the SAME job, so a retry is not charged twice; request_id names a deliberately repeated request. One authoring turn at a time per project (authoring-in-progress). Ops:

  • revestir_como_autor: Re-dress ONE scene's visual as an animated author's scene (a world with an actor where the data lives), keeping the narration word for word; for a still image held too long. LLM. Args: scene_index, brief? (only the VISUAL is re-dressed as an animated author's scene by the piece's director; the narration stays word for word, so the voice is reused; brief orients the world/actor).

  • rewrite_scene: Re-author one scene (script and visual) under a brief. LLM. Args: scene_index, brief (the WHOLE scene is re-authored under the brief).

  • tighten_hook: Strengthen the opening hook (scene 0). LLM. Args: brief? (scene 0). Requires the write scope. Spends LLM budget (charged like a chat turn).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
opYes
argsYesOp arguments (see description).
project_idYes
request_idNoOptional: a caller-chosen key for this request (up to 64 characters). The same key returns the same job for 24 h; a new key runs it again. Without it, an identical call within 15 minutes is the same request.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / op / enum
      Previous value: -[
      -  "rewrite_scene",
      -  "tighten_hook"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "revestir_como_autor",
      +  "rewrite_scene",
      +  "tighten_hook"
      +]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / request_id / description
      Previous value: -"Optional: a key of your own for this request (up to 64 characters). The same key returns the same job for 24 h; a new key runs it again. Without it, an identical call within 15 minutes is the same request."New value: +"Optional: a caller-chosen key for this request (up to 64 characters). The same key returns the same job for 24 h; a new key runs it again. Without it, an identical call within 15 minutes is the same request."
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations, the description discloses the 60-second wait behavior, the two possible outcomes with runId, the 15-minute deduplication window, the request_id 24-hour behavior, one-authoring-turn-per-project concurrency, and LLM budget spending. These are exactly the behavioral traits an agent needs before invoking a paid, destructive mutation.

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?

The description is dense and front-loads the core behavior, waiting semantics, and outcomes before listing ops. It duplicates some request_id details already present in the schema and is somewhat lengthy, but nearly every sentence provides actionable context for a complex tool.

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?

Given the complexity, missing output schema, and nested args, the description is complete enough to call the tool correctly: it explains staged results, commit implications, outcomes, run IDs, retry behavior, concurrency limits, scope, and budget. Nothing critical appears to be 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?

The schema's nested args object is only described as 'Op arguments (see description)', but the description compensates by listing each op's arguments and explaining scene_index, brief, and when brief is optional. It also explains request_id semantics beyond the schema, though it does not specify formats for project_id or scene_index.

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 description states a clear verb and resource: it runs one LLM re-authoring edit op and stages the result into the conversation draft. The three supported ops are enumerated with distinct behavior, although sibling tools such as run_op and stage_op are not explicitly named or contrasted.

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 gives specific conditions for each op, e.g. revestir_como_autor for a still image held too long, rewrite_scene for wholesale scene re-authoring, and tighten_hook for scene 0. It also states the write-scope and budget prerequisites, but does not explicitly say when to choose this tool over sibling tools like run_op or stage_op.

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