flayr

Combine clips into a finished video

combine_clips

[writes flayr data · write scope] Extends a video draft (id) with more clips and image cards into ONE finished video, rendered by flayr and saved as a NEW linked draft (same brand, caption copied, credits merged, labelled variant:combined). Nothing is posted and the original is unchanged. Use it to show a finished print with painting/assembly clips before or after it. segments (2-8, in order) must include the video itself as { kind: "clip", contentId: id }; clips are Library videos (contentId) or uploads (storageId from upload_media) with inMs/outMs (or durationMs = the clip's full length); cards are images (contentId of a Library image or video thumbnail, or imageStorageId) with durationMs and optional text. transition cut|crossfade, audio keep|mute_extras|main_across. Max 60 min by default (long-form: cold open + trimmed recording + bumpers). Costs 25 Embers per started minute of output for the first 3 min, then 5 per further started minute by default (refunded on failure). Returns a jobId — poll get_job_status. (Wraps POST /api/v2/content/{id}/combine.)

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": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "segments": "<segments>"
    },
    "name": "combine_clips"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	The video to extend.
`audio`	No		keep
`segments`	Yes	In playback order. Must include this video ({ "kind": "clip", "contentId": "<id>" }).
`transition`	No		cut
`crossfadeMs`	No	Crossfade overlap per join.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 21, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Adds substantial behavior beyond the annotations (readOnly=false, destructive=false, idempotent=false): a new linked draft is created with caption copied and credits merged, the original is untouched, nothing is published, cost is 25 Embers per started minute with refunds on failure, and a 60-min default cap. This is rich disclosure an agent could not infer from the structured fields.

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?

Dense but front-loaded: scope, core behavior, and parameter guidance come before the cost/polling tail. Nearly every clause earns its place, though the single run-on paragraph with semicolons could be broken up slightly for scanability.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description states the return value ('Returns a jobId') and the follow-up action ('poll get_job_status'), plus limits and cost. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

With only 60% schema coverage, the description compensates heavily: it explains segments must include the video itself as {kind:'clip', contentId:id}, that clips use contentId (Library) or storageId (upload) with inMs/outMs or durationMs, that cards use image contentId or imageStorageId with durationMs/text, and enumerates transition and audio behaviors. This meaningfully exceeds the schema.

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?

Opens with a scope marker and a precise verb+resource: extends a video draft (`id`) with clips/cards into ONE finished video saved as a NEW linked draft. It clearly distinguishes itself from the create_content/update_content siblings by stating 'Nothing is posted and the original is unchanged' and the variant:combined labelling.

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?

Gives a concrete usage scenario ('to show a finished print with painting/assembly clips before or after it') and a post-call workflow ('Returns a jobId — poll get_job_status'). It does not name an alternative tool to use when the agent shouldn't combine, so it stops short of explicit when-not guidance.

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

All flayr tools Inspect

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

Need Help?