Skip to main content
Glama

Emero

by io.github.EmeroAI
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Check generation

check_generation

Fetch the result of a generate / combine_videos job — pass the id it returned. Long-polls ~30s and, the moment it's ready, SHOWS the result to the user AND returns a copy you can see (one image, or a video poster frame) — so you never need a second call to view it. While rendering it reports elapsed vs typical time and whether to keep polling (short jobs) or STOP and hand off for a long render — for a long render, tell the user the wait and call this once when they return, don't poll in a loop. The progress % is coarse (not an ETA).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
job_idYes
project_idNoOpaque per-chat project id: "p-" plus 6 random letters and digits. Every chat is a new project. Mint one on your first emero call and pass that SAME id on every call in this chat. Never mint a second one in the same chat, even for a new topic, campaign or subject. Only when the user asks to continue an earlier project, reuse its id from get_emero_brain's project list.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / project_id / description
      Previous value: -"Opaque per-chat project id. Mint one on your first emero action, pass that SAME id every call. One project per chat: NEVER mint a second for a new topic/campaign/subject/vibe — all stay in the one project; a new id is only for a new chat (server folds a stray id back in). A new chat the user says continues an earlier project reuses that project's id (from get_emero_brain's project list)."New value: +"Opaque per-chat project id: \"p-\" plus 6 random letters and digits. Every chat is a new project. Mint one on your first emero call and pass that SAME id on every call in this chat. Never mint a second one in the same chat, even for a new topic, campaign or subject. Only when the user asks to continue an earlier project, reuse its id from get_emero_brain's project list."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the long-poll duration, the user-visible side effect of displaying the result, the two-part return (shown result + copy for the agent), progress reporting versus typical time, and that the percentage is coarse rather than an ETA. It does not cover what is returned or how to react when a job fails or is cancelled, which is the main remaining gap.

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 the 'no second call needed' payoff, and every sentence adds an operational fact rather than filler. It is dense and clause-heavy with caps emphasis, which slightly hurts scannability, but 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?

For a 2-param polling tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies the essential return shape (one image or a video poster frame) and full polling policy. The one missing piece is failure/cancellation behavior, which an agent would likely encounter while polling a render job.

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 50%; job_id has no schema description, but the description compensates by explaining it is 'the id it returned' from generate/combine_videos, which gives the agent its provenance. project_id is already fully documented in the schema, so no duplication is needed.

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+resource ('fetch the result of a generate / combine_videos job') and identifies the sibling tools that produce the id. It also distinguishes itself from a plain lookup by noting the result is both shown to the user and returned, so no separate view call is needed.

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?

Gives explicit branching guidance: keep polling for short jobs, but for a long render 'STOP and hand off' and call once when the user returns, with an explicit 'don't poll in a loop' prohibition. It also explains the polling window (~30s) and which id to pass, so the agent knows exactly when and how to invoke it.

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

All Emero 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