Skip to main content
Glama

storyboard_read

Reads a PUSHING CREATION storyboard table from storyboard.md or a project directory, so AI agents can load existing storyboard data before editing video.

Instructions

Read a PUSHING CREATION storyboard table from storyboard.md or a project directory.

Args: path: Absolute path to storyboard.md or to a project directory containing storyboard.md.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes
overwriteNoExplicitly allow replacing existing media. Existing non-media files are protected.

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

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full load, yet it only says 'Read'. The schema exposes an 'overwrite' flag that speaks of 'replacing existing media', which implies this read can write or materialize files; the description never acknowledges that side effect, its risks, or its permissions.

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?

One-sentence purpose followed by a compact Args block, front-loaded and free of filler. Slightly awkward that the Args block is the only place path details appear.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. Still, a tool with an undocumented mutating flag and no usage guidance leaves gaps an agent must guess at before calling.

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 50%. The description usefully clarifies 'path' as an absolute path to either storyboard.md itself or a directory containing it, which is real added meaning over a bare string. However, the second parameter ('overwrite') is never mentioned or reconciled with the 'read' framing.

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 resource: reads a PUSHING CREATION storyboard table from storyboard.md or a project directory. That is distinguishable from render-oriented siblings like video_storyboard. It stops short of naming which sibling to prefer when both could apply.

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 statement of when to use this versus video_storyboard or style_pack_read, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must infer call conditions entirely from the 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