AIGigLab MCP Server

generate_thumbnail_concepts

Analyze a video title and script to generate viral thumbnail concepts and hooks that boost click-through rates.

Instructions

Analyze a video title/script and generate viral thumbnail concepts (hooks).

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": {
      "videoTitle": "<videoTitle>"
    },
    "name": "generate_thumbnail_concepts"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`videoTitle`	Yes	The title of the YouTube video
`videoScript`	No	Brief script or summary of the video content

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.3.0Jul 15, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the basic function without mentioning side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or whether the operation is read-only or destructive. This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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?

Single sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource. Highly efficient.

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?

The description lacks explanation of what constitutes a 'thumbnail concept' or 'hook', the format of the output, or how many concepts are generated. Without an output schema, this information is missing, making the tool incomplete for an agent to interpret results.

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% with clear parameter descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond 'analyze a video title/script', which is already implied. A score of 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's action (analyze and generate) and its resource (video title/script to produce viral thumbnail concepts/hooks). It distinguishes itself from siblings like generate_thumbnail_image by specifying that it generates concepts, not images.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., generate_thumbnail_image for actual thumbnails). The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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