clipkit

Create a new Clipkit project

create_project

Create a new, blank Clipkit project with the given dimensions and duration, and return its project_id. Defaults: 1920×1080, 10 seconds, 30 fps, output_format "mp4". Call this first when starting a new video. Pass an existing project_id to reset that project to blank; omit it to start a fresh project (note the returned id for subsequent tools).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`width`	No	Composition width in pixels. Default 1920.
`height`	No	Composition height in pixels. Default 1080.
`duration`	No	Composition duration in seconds. Default 10.
`frame_rate`	No	Frame rate. Default 30.
`project_id`	No	Which project to act on — the id returned by create_project / set_project / create_promo / load_project. ALWAYS pass it once a project exists in this conversation; omitting it on a build tool creates a brand-new project. (Omit only on the local stdio server working a single project.)
`output_dither`	No	Anti-banding output dither — DEFAULT ON, leave unset. Pass false for byte-exact undithered output, or { amplitude, pattern } to tune. Stops gradients / soft shadows / blur from showing 8-bit banding; deterministic.
`output_format`	No	Output container/codec. Default "mp4".
`background_color`	No	Hex color, e.g. "#000000".

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`width`	No
`height`	No
`duration`	No
`frame_rate`	No
`project_id`	Yes	Id of the created project — pass to subsequent tools.
`output_format`	No

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=false, but the description states that passing an existing project_id resets that project to blank, which is a destructive action. This is a direct contradiction, requiring a score of 1 per the rubric.

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?

Two dense sentences cover purpose, defaults, usage order, and reset behavior without wasted words. Each sentence earns its place and the description is appropriately front-loaded with the core action.

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?

Description provides defaults, when to call, reset behavior, and note to record the returned id. Since an output schema exists, return values need not be explained. However, the contradiction with the destructiveHint annotation leaves safety ambiguity.

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 adds meaningful semantics for project_id by explaining reset vs. fresh creation, and it restates defaults for width/height/duration/frame_rate/output_format, which reinforces but goes slightly beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states it creates a new, blank Clipkit project with specified dimensions and duration, and returns project_id. The description also distinguishes fresh creation from resetting an existing project, which separates it from siblings like create_promo or set_project.

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?

Explicitly instructs 'Call this first when starting a new video' and explains when to pass or omit project_id, giving actionable usage guidance. It doesn't compare directly with alternatives, but context makes the usage clear.

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

All clipkit tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: project lifecycle (create, set, load, get, describe, validate), element manipulation (add, edit, delete), asset ingestion, preview, promo creation, schema access, and documentation. No two tools overlap in functionality.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern, e.g., create_project, add_element, describe_project. No deviations or mixed conventions.

Tool Count5/5

15 tools is well-scoped for a video editing server, covering project management, element editing, asset handling, preview, validation, and promo generation without being excessive or sparse.

Completeness4/5

Core CRUD operations for projects and elements are covered, along with asset ingestion, schema access, and preview. However, the critical render_video tool is mentioned in descriptions but missing from the tool list, creating a notable gap in the workflow.

Create a new Clipkit project

Input Schema

Output Schema

TDQS

Glama MCP Gateway

TDQS

Resources