quiz_video_get_renderFetch the status and progress of a render session. When status is "completed", the response also contains a signed videoUrl (and filename) so the agent can share the MP4 directly without a separate quiz_video_download_render call. In-progress polls return status + progress.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sessionId | Yes | Render session id returned when the render was started. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: it reveals what the response includes in the completed state (signed videoUrl and filename) and what in-progress polls return (status + progress). This helps the agent understand the tool's behavior without needing an output schema.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is only two sentences and front-loads the primary purpose in the first sentence. The second sentence adds essential edge-case behavior (completed vs. in-progress) without redundancy. Every sentence earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple one-parameter polling tool with no output schema, the description is complete. It explains both possible responses (completed with videoUrl, in-progress with status+progress) and even references the download alternative. There is no missing information an agent would need to correctly invoke the tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% for the single sessionId parameter, and the description does not add further param details. The schema already documents that sessionId is the render session id returned when the render was started. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage and no need for extra compensation.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Fetch the status and progress of a render session.' It also distinguishes itself from the sibling quiz_video_download_render by explaining that a completed render includes a signed videoUrl, so no separate download call is needed. This clearly identifies the tool's unique role.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly states when to use this tool versus the download alternative: when status is 'completed', the response contains a direct videoUrl, avoiding a separate quiz_video_download_render call. It also characterizes polling behavior ('In-progress polls return status + progress'), giving the agent clear context for repeated checks.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Every tool targets a distinct resource and action (create/get/list/update/delete per entity). Overlapping pairs like get_render vs download_render are clearly differentiated by their purpose, and generate_quiz vs create_quiz serve different creation modes. There is no ambiguity between tools.
The vast majority of tools follow a consistent 'quiz_video_<verb>_<noun>' pattern in snake_case. The only deviation is the three discovery tools (get_api_catalog, get_llms_txt, get_openapi_spec) which omit the 'quiz_video_' prefix, though they still use a clear verb_noun structure.
With 30 tools, the server is on the heavier side and exceeds the typical 15-tool guideline. However, the count is justified by the breadth of resources covered (quizzes, questions, hooks, templates, flashcard decks, renders, music, account) and each tool has a distinct role, so the size feels appropriate for a comprehensive API surface.
The server covers full CRUD for most core resources (quizzes, templates, flashcard decks, hooks) and add/list for questions. Minor gaps include no individual question update/delete and no direct render deletion, but these are not critical and the main workflows (create → view → render → download) are fully covered.