Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@aiwerk/mcp-server-elevenlabs

@aiwerk/mcp-server-elevenlabs

by AIWerk
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

get_chapter_snapshots

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists saved snapshots for a specific ElevenLabs Studio chapter using its project ID and chapter ID, helping you review or restore chapter versions.

Instructions

List Chapter Snapshots

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>",
      "chapter_id": "<chapter_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_chapter_snapshots"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chapter_idYesThe ID of the chapter.
project_idYesThe ID of the Studio project.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description contributes nothing further — no mention of ordering, pagination, or what a snapshot represents relative to a project snapshot.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

It is a single short phrase with no waste and no verbosity, but it is under-specified rather than tight — there is simply nothing beyond the name, so the brevity reflects missing content rather than disciplined writing.

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

Completeness2/5

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

With no output schema and no annotations gap, the description still needs to explain what a chapter snapshot is and how the listing behaves (ordering, pagination, or relationship to project snapshots). An agent cannot tell from this text what it will receive or how to apply the result.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Both parameters (project_id, chapter_id) are documented at 100% schema coverage, so the schema carries the parameter semantics. The description adds no additional meaning, which is the baseline-3 case for a fully covered schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description is essentially a restatement of the tool name and title: 'list' + 'Chapter Snapshots'. It does not distinguish this from close siblings such as get_chapter_snapshot_endpoint (singular) or get_project_snapshots, nor indicate what a snapshot contains or how the list is scoped.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool instead of get_chapter_snapshot_endpoint or get_chapter_by_id_endpoint. No prerequisites, no exclusions, no alternatives are named.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools