Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
z_ai_image_gen_mcp

z_ai_image_gen_mcp

by GeorgH93
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_video_result

Retrieve the output of an asynchronous video generation task by providing the task ID. Get the final video result after processing.

Instructions

Retrieve the result of an asynchronous video generation task. Use the task ID from generate_video.

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": {
      "task_id": "<task_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_video_result"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
task_idYesThe task ID returned by generate_video

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states 'Retrieve the result' without disclosing whether the call is idempotent, non-destructive, or if it can return pending states. Lacks details on polling behavior.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two sentences with no redundancy; front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word is meaningful.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given a single parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it omits mention of potential states (e.g., pending, completed) and any guidance on polling behavior.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema already describes the parameter as 'The task ID returned by generate_video'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what is in 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?

Description clearly states 'Retrieve the result of an asynchronous video generation task', specifying the action and resource. Distinguishes from siblings like get_async_result by explicitly mentioning video generation.

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?

The phrase 'Use the task ID from generate_video' gives context for when to use, but there is no guidance on when not to use, such as for tasks still processing, or alternatives like get_async_result.

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