Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Valmera — AI Video Editor

by io.valmera
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Proof device

proof_device
Read-only

Renders small evidence windows with and without selected devices and returns frame strips, changed-pixel overlays and timing or layout measurements. Metrics include landing error, legibility, matte jitter, flash risk, junction integrity and face collisions.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>"
    },
    "name": "proof_device"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
endNo
idsNo
startNo
project_idYesExplicit project identifier for this request. The connection's navigation pointer does not select the target.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / project_id / description
      Previous value: -"Required immutable scope for this call. Copy the id from list_projects/open_project/project_state; the active-project pointer is never used to guess."New value: +"Explicit project identifier for this request. The connection's navigation pointer does not select the target."
  2. Added

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful output context by naming frame strips, changed-pixel overlays, timing/layout measurements, and specific metrics, but it omits rendering cost, limits, or supported device scope.

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 two sentences are front-loaded with the rendering action and then enumerate outputs and metrics without filler. The metric list is dense but relevant to what the tool returns.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only rendering/proofing tool with no output schema, the description usefully explains the return artifacts and metrics. However, it leaves key gaps around parameter semantics, usage conditions, and how device ids relate to the start/end range.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 25%, with project_id the sole documented parameter. The description hints that 'ids' corresponds to selected devices but gives no meaning for start or end, no units or ranges, and does not compensate for the undocumented parameters.

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 action and output family: it renders evidence windows with and without selected devices, returning frame strips, overlays, and measurements. That is clearer than a tautology, though the jargon 'evidence windows' is not defined and the description does not differentiate it from nearby siblings such as render_preview or suggest_devices.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

It implies a comparison use case by mentioning rendering with and without devices, but never states when an agent should call this tool versus alternatives. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or sibling references.

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

All Valmera — AI Video Editor 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