Skip to main content
Glama
KyaniteLabs

kinocut

by KyaniteLabs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

video_release_checkpoint

Create a thumbnail and storyboard only after a video passes a hard quality gate, enabling human inspection before publishing; videos without audio fail unless audio is disabled.

Instructions

Create preview artifacts only after the video passes quality gates.

Use this before publishing or chaining more polish effects. It runs a hard quality gate, then writes a thumbnail and storyboard for human inspection. A video with no audio stream fails the gate unless require_audio is explicitly disabled.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
min_scoreNo
overwriteNoExplicitly allow replacing existing media. Existing non-media files are protected.
input_pathYes
output_dirNo
frame_countNo
require_audioNo

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. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.16.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • addedInput schema / properties / require_audio
      Added value: +{
+  "default": true,
+  "title": "Require Audio",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  3. Addedv1.5.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations exist, and the description does real work: it discloses a hard gate, the two artifacts produced, and a concrete failure condition (no audio stream fails unless require_audio is disabled). It omits whether existing artifacts are replaced (overwrite semantics) and what the gate actually scores against, both of which an agent would want before a write.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the action then the timing guidance then the mechanism and the edge case. Little waste, though the gate-then-artifacts relationship could be stated in one clause instead of two.

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 needn't be described, and the headline behavior plus failure mode are covered. But for a 6-parameter, no-annotation, write-producing tool, the unexplained threshold and frame/output parameters leave the description short of fully equipping an agent to call it correctly.

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 only 17%, so the description must compensate, and it does explain require_audio's effect precisely. However min_score (the gate threshold), frame_count, and output_dir get no explanation, leaving three of six parameters undocumented in both places.

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 compound action: run a hard quality gate, then write a thumbnail and storyboard. This clearly separates it from siblings that only produce a thumbnail (video_thumbnail) or only check quality (video_quality_check), though those comparisons are implied rather than named.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

"Use this before publishing or chaining more polish effects" gives an explicit usage moment, which is the key decision an agent needs. It stops short of naming exclusions or pointing at the lighter-weight alternatives for a gate-only or preview-only need.

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