Skip to main content
Glama

Valmera — agentic AI video editor

by io.valmera
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Read an editing skill

read_skill
Read-only

PROJECT-SCOPED: this call acts only on the explicit project_id and returns the project identity with its result. Load a focused editing playbook (captions, zooms, audio, transitions, ...) into this turn. The SKILLS list in your instructions names them. Read the matching skill before your first edit of that kind — batch it with your other reading calls. Pass section to retrieve only the decision, evidence, pattern, failure, verification, or repair material needed now.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
sectionNo
project_idYesRequired immutable scope for this call. Copy the id from list_projects/open_project/project_state; the active-project pointer is never used to guess.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / enum
      Added value: +[
+  "audio",
+  "beats-emphasis",
+  "broll-inserts",
+  "captions",
+  "cutting",
+  "effects-grades",
+  "formats",
+  "generate-fetch",
+  "hooks-retention",
+  "music",
+  "reframe-aspect",
+  "review",
+  "screen-takeover",
+  "short-form-direction",
+  "text-graphics",
+  "transitions",
+  "zooms"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it acts only on the explicit project_id, never the active-project pointer, and returns the project identity with the result. This goes beyond the annotations and clarifies scope and return behavior, which is useful for an agent.

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?

The description is efficient and well-structured. It leads with the most critical scoping constraint, then the purpose, then usage guidance and parameter hints. Every sentence carries useful information; there is no fluff or repetition. It is appropriately sized for a tool with three parameters.

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 read-only knowledge tool with no output schema, the description explains what it returns (project identity with the skill content) and how to use it. It covers scoping, timing, and parameter usage. It does not detail error conditions or exhaustive return format, but given the tool's simplicity and the annotations, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to call it correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 33% (only project_id has a description). The description compensates fully: it explains that project_id is a required immutable scope to copy from specific sources, it clarifies the purpose of 'section' (retrieve only decision/evidence/etc.), and it directs the agent to the SKILLS list for 'name'. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare enum names.

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?

The description clearly states the tool loads a focused editing playbook (a knowledge resource) into the current turn, and explicitly notes it is project-scoped and returns the project identity. This distinguishes it from the many edit-application tools in the sibling list, which actually mutate video. The verb 'read' plus the resource (skill) makes the purpose unambiguous.

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?

The description gives concrete when-to-use guidance: read the matching skill before the first edit of that kind, and batch it with other reading calls. It also explains how to use the 'section' parameter to retrieve only needed material. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the context makes it clear this is a knowledge-retrieval tool versus the many editing tools. That is sufficient for an agent to select it correctly.

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

All Valmera — agentic 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