Skip to main content
Glama

video_to_video_create_video

What this API does

Create the same Video To Video you can make in the browser, but programmatically, so you can automate it, run it at scale, or connect it to your own app or workflow.

Good for

  • Automation and batch processing

  • Adding video to video into apps, pipelines, or tools

How it works (3 steps)

  1. Upload your inputs (video, image, or audio) with Generate Upload URLs and copy the file_path.

  2. Send a request to create a video to video job with the basic fields.

  3. Check the job status until it's complete, then download the result from downloads.

Key options

  • Inputs: usually a file, sometimes a YouTube link, depending on project type

  • Resolution: free users are limited to 576px; higher plans unlock HD and larger sizes

  • Extra fields: e.g. face_swap_mode, start_seconds/end_seconds, or a text prompt

Cost
Credits are only charged for the frames that actually render. You'll see an estimate when the job is queued, and the final total after it's done.

For detailed examples, see the product page.

MCP guidance:

  • This starts an async video generation job and returns id plus credits_charged immediately. If the user wants the finished result, call the wait_for_video_project helper with the returned id, or poll the matching GET /v1/video-projects/{id} endpoint until status is complete, error, or canceled. Completed projects include downloads with direct URLs. The custom wait helper also returns exact_download_urls separately from expiration metadata.

  • For *_file_path values, prefer an existing Magic Hour file path or a file_path returned by the upload-URL endpoint after the file bytes are uploaded. Direct public media URLs may work when they are stable, fetchable, and return raw file bytes, but hotlinked URLs can fail; when in doubt, use the presigned upload flow first and pass the returned file_path.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoGive your video a custom name for easy identification.Video To Video - dateTime
styleYes
assetsYesProvide the assets for video-to-video. For video, The `video_source` field determines whether `video_file_path` or `youtube_url` field is used
contextNoExplain in 15-25 words, in third person, why this tool is called and how it supports the user's goal. For analytics only. You MUST describe only the abstract purpose of the tool call. NEVER include, repeat, paraphrase, or infer personal, sensitive, or identifying information from the user request or tool results, including names, emails, phone numbers, IPs, IDs, or credentials. You MUST generalize specific entities into roles such as "a user", "the customer", or "an account". Example: "Retrieving a customer's recent orders to investigate a billing issue and help support determine the appropriate resolution."
end_secondsYesEnd time of your clip (seconds). Must be greater than start_seconds.
start_secondsYesStart time of your clip (seconds). Must be ≥ 0.
fps_resolutionNoDetermines whether the resulting video will have the same frame per second as the original video, or half. * `FULL` - the result video will have the same FPS as the input video * `HALF` - the result video will have half the FPS as the input videoHALF

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesUnique ID of the video. Use it with the [Get video Project API](https://docs.magichour.ai/api-reference/video-projects/get-video-details) to fetch status and downloads.
credits_chargedYesThe amount of credits deducted from your account to generate the video. If the status is not 'complete', this value is an estimate and may be adjusted upon completion based on the actual FPS of the output video. If video generation fails, credits will be refunded, and this field will be updated to include the refund.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / context
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Explain in 15-25 words, in third person, why this tool is called and how it supports the user's goal. For analytics only. You MUST describe only the abstract purpose of the tool call. NEVER include, repeat, paraphrase, or infer personal, sensitive, or identifying information from the user request or tool results, including names, emails, phone numbers, IPs, IDs, or credentials. You MUST generalize specific entities into roles such as \"a user\", \"the customer\", or \"an account\". Example: \"Retrieving a customer's recent orders to investigate a billing issue and help support determine the appropriate resolution.\"",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses that the job is asynchronous and immediately returns `id` plus `credits_charged`, enumerates terminal statuses (complete/error/canceled), explains the credits-per-rendered-frame cost model with estimate-at-queue vs final total, and warns that hotlinked media URLs can fail. It also flags build-time concerns like the presigned upload flow for `*_file_path` values.

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?

It is long, but the header-based structure (What it does / Good for / How it works / Key options / Cost / MCP guidance) is front-loaded and scannable, with the core async-return behavior surfaced early. There is some repetition — the presigned upload flow is described in both the numbered steps and the final bullet.

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?

For a complex tool with 7 parameters, nested objects, and an output schema, the description covers the end-to-end lifecycle an agent needs: input sourcing, job creation, polling/status handling, and result retrieval via `downloads`. Return-value detail is correctly left to the output schema while the async contract is explained.

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 description coverage is already high (86%), so the baseline is 3; the description adds real value by tying `*_file_path` values to the upload-URL endpoint, warning about unstable hotlinked URLs, and noting constraints like free-tier 576px resolution and start/end second usage. Minor imprecision: it references `face_swap_mode`, which is not among this tool's schema fields.

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 specific verb+resource — programmatically creating a Video To Video job — and describes the workflow, cost, and options. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from close siblings like image_to_video_create_video, text_to_video_create_video, or animation_create_video, so an agent must infer the distinction from the tool name and the 'video source' framing.

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 clear when-to-use context (automation, batch processing, embedding in apps/pipelines) and a concrete 3-step invocation path. It also names the follow-up alternative, `wait_for_video_project`, for retrieving the finished result. It stops short of stating when *not* to use this versus the other create_video siblings.

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.