Skip to main content
Glama
KyaniteLabs

kinocut

by KyaniteLabs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

glitch_macroblocking

Apply a macroblocking glitch effect to videos by simulating codec artifacts through downscaling/upscaling, blocky pixelation, and color posterization.

Instructions

Apply macroblocking glitch effect.

Simulates codec artifacting by downscaling/upscaling to create blocky pixelation combined with color posterization.

Args: input_path: Absolute path to input video. output_path: Absolute path for output video. block_size: Block size in pixels. Default 16. intensity: Blend with original (0-1). Default 0.7. color_reduction: Color level reduction (0-1). Default 0.3.

Returns: Dict with success status and output_path.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
intensityNo
overwriteNoExplicitly allow replacing existing media. Existing non-media files are protected.
block_sizeNo
input_pathYes
output_pathNo
color_reductionNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.16.4
    • addedInput schema / properties / overwrite
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Explicitly allow replacing existing media. Existing non-media files are protected.",
+  "title": "Overwrite",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv1.16.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  3. Addedv1.5.1

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the processing approach and the return shape (success flag + output_path), which is useful, but says nothing about overwrite semantics, whether the input is modified, cost/perf, or failure modes for an inherently destructive-looking media write.

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?

Front-loaded one-line purpose followed by a short mechanism sentence and a compact Args/Returns block. No filler; every line conveys usable information.

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?

Adequate for a media-mutating effect: parameters and return value are covered and an output schema exists. But with zero annotations and a low schema coverage, omitting file-overwrite behavior and side effects leaves a meaningful gap for a write operation.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is only 17%, so the description must compensate — and it does, documenting 5 of 6 params with meaning and defaults (block size in pixels, intensity as blend with original 0-1, color reduction level). Only 'overwrite' is undocumented in the description, though the schema covers it.

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?

Names a specific action and effect ('Apply macroblocking glitch effect') and explains the mechanism: downscale/upscale blocky pixelation plus color posterization. That mechanism effectively separates it from neighbors like glitch_rgb_shift or transition_pixelate, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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 statement of when to choose this effect over the many other glitch/transition tools, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. Only implied usage ('use this to make a macroblocking glitch') is present.

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