Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

CutClip.one

by one.cutclip
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

render.final

Start a full-resolution final export of the project's current timeline to MP4 (§11.8). Costs 5 credits at 1080p (the default), 10 at 2k (2560x1440) or 15 at 4k, charged to the project owner; fails with INSUFFICIENT_CREDITS if they can't cover it. The resolution is the short side for portrait/square shapes (9:16 at 1080p is 1080x1920). Aspect, fit, codec and quality don't change the price.

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": {
      "projectId": "<projectId>"
    },
    "name": "render.final"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fitNoWhen the aspect differs from the project's: fill (default) center-crops the picture, fit shows all of it with black bars
codecNoh264 (default; plays everywhere) or h265 (HEVC: ~40% smaller files, slower to render)
aspectNoShape of the exported video; project (default) keeps the project's own frame. 9:16 / 4:5 for Reels, Shorts and TikTok
qualityNostandard (default) or high (less compression, bigger file)
projectIdYes
resolutionNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the whole burden, and it does well on cost (5/10/15 credits), billing target (project owner) and failure mode (INSUFFICIENT_CREDITS). However, it never discloses that this is an asynchronous job start whose result must be polled via render.status / render.get_result, nor whether re-invoking creates duplicate renders — significant omissions for a paid, long-running mutation.

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?

Four dense sentences with the operation front-loaded and the cost/failure information immediately after. Pricing detail is slightly verbose but each fact (tier costs, billing target, portrait rule, price invariance) heads off a real caller mistake.

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 paid async export with six parameters and no output schema, the definition covers cost, failure, and resolution interpretation well. The remaining gap is lifecycle information — that the call kicks off a job and where the MP4 lands — which matters given siblings render.status, render.get_result and render.list_for_project exist.

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 67%, and the description compensates by explaining resolution semantics ('the short side for portrait/square shapes', 9:16 at 1080p is 1080x1920) and the price invariance of aspect, fit, codec and quality — meaning the schema's enum descriptions do not supply. It adds no detail on projectId, though that is self-evident.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Start a full-resolution final export of the project's current timeline to MP4.' The word 'final' implicitly separates it from render.preview, but the description never names the sibling that an agent would otherwise confuse it with, so differentiation is left partly to inference.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied rather than stated: 'full-resolution final' signals this is the production export rather than a preview, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance, no naming of render.preview as the cheaper alternative, and no prerequisites such as a rendered timeline.

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

All CutClip.one 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