reels

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

reels_edit_shot

Patch specific fields of a 3D reel shot in one request, merging camera changes while replacing other supplied values without rewriting scene code.

Instructions

Patch only supplied fields in one shot. Camera fields merge; other supplied fields replace. No scene code or full-project rewrite.

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>",
      "revision": "<revision>",
      "shotId": "<shotId>",
      "patch": "<patch>"
    },
    "name": "reels_edit_shot"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`patch`	Yes
`shotId`	Yes
`revision`	Yes
`projectId`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare write-but-non-destructive and closed-world; the description adds the non-obvious merge-vs-replace rule (camera merges, everything else replaces), which is real behavioral value the schema does not convey. It omits how the required revision is used for conflict detection and what happens on a stale revision.

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?

Three short sentences with the core patching rule front-loaded and no filler. The closing clause "No scene code or full-project rewrite" is slightly ambiguous as written (no scene code in the patch, or the tool does not touch scene code).

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?

For a tool with a deeply nested patch object (entities up to 40, animations, camera paths), four required parameters, no parameter descriptions, and no output schema, three sentences leave too much unstated. An agent cannot tell from the description how to obtain or advance revision, nor how entity arrays behave on conflict.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the naming burden, yet it never explains projectId, shotId, or revision. Only the patch merge behavior is illuminated; the critical concurrency parameter revision is left entirely undefined, and per-field replacement of entities is only hinted at by "other supplied fields replace".

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?

"Patch only supplied fields in one shot" gives a specific verb (patch) and scope (one shot, supplied fields only), which is meaningfully narrower than siblings like reels_create or reels_edit_entity. It stops short of explicitly naming those siblings, so an agent must infer the distinction from the "no full-project rewrite" clause.

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?

"No scene code or full-project rewrite" implies the boundary against broader-edit tools, but no sibling is named and no precondition (e.g., fetch current revision first) is stated. Usage is implied rather than instructed.

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