Skip to main content
Glama
KyaniteLabs

kinocut

by KyaniteLabs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

glitch_screen_tearing

Apply a screen tearing glitch effect to video by creating horizontal tear bands that shift left and right over time. Add digital distortion to footage for retro or corrupted-signal looks.

Instructions

Apply screen tearing glitch effect.

Creates horizontal tear bands at varying Y positions that shift left/right over time.

Args: input_path: Absolute path to input video. output_path: Absolute path for output video. tear_count: Number of tear bands. Default 5. offset_range: Max horizontal offset in pixels. Default 80. speed: Animation speed. Default 3.

Returns: Dict with success status and output_path.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
speedNo
overwriteNoExplicitly allow replacing existing media. Existing non-media files are protected.
input_pathYes
tear_countNo
output_pathNo
offset_rangeNo

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

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden; it does describe the animation semantics (tear bands at varying Y positions, horizontal offset over time) and defaults, which is useful. However it is silent on overwrite/protection semantics, whether audio is preserved, and any side effects of writing to output_path, leaving meaningful gaps for a mutation tool.

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?

Front-loaded with the effect and its visual behavior, then Args/Returns in a conventional structured form. The Returns section is largely redundant given the output schema exists, but overall it is compact and wastes little space.

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

Completeness5/5

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

An output schema exists, so the description needn't explain return shape beyond its one line; combined with documented parameters and behavior, an agent has enough to invoke it correctly.

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 description coverage is only 17%, so the description meaningfully compensates: it explains units and defaults for tear_count, offset_range (pixels), and speed, and clarifies input/output paths as absolute video paths. It omits the `overwrite` parameter entirely and does not clarify that output_path is optional/nullable (auto-derived), which is a gap given low schema coverage.

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?

States a specific verb and effect ('Apply screen tearing glitch effect') and elaborates with a concrete visual description of horizontal tear bands shifting left/right. It is distinguishable from siblings like glitch_scanline_jitter or glitch_rgb_shift by the visual mechanism, but it never explicitly contrasts itself with them.

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 choose this glitch effect versus the many sibling glitch/transition tools, nor any stated prerequisites (e.g., input codec support, processing expectations). The agent must infer usage entirely from the effect name.

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