Skip to main content
Glama

cineflow_scene_graph_get

Retrieves a project's Directed Scene Graph, including nodes, narrative cuts, continuity carryover, and timeline order for scene planning and editing.

Instructions

Retrieve the Directed Scene Graph, including nodes, narrative edges/cuts, continuity carryover, and timeline sequence.

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": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>"
    },
    "name": "cineflow_scene_graph_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYesProject identifier (e.g. 'p_cyber_noir').

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the call returns a composed structure (nodes, edges/cuts, continuity, timeline), which is useful, but says nothing about permissions, response size, cost, or whether the graph is computed or stored.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource name leads and the returned components follow. It is dense with domain jargon but nothing is extraneous.

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?

For a simple one-parameter read with no output schema, the description should convey what comes back, and it lists the graph's components. However, it does not indicate the shape or depth of those components (e.g., whether nodes include transform data), leaving the agent without a clear picture of the response.

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?

There is a single required parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already documents project_id including an example value. The description adds no additional meaning about that parameter, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

The description uses a specific verb ("Retrieve") with a named resource ("Directed Scene Graph") and enumerates its contents: nodes, narrative edges/cuts, continuity carryover, timeline sequence. This clearly separates it from the sibling cineflow_scene_graph_update, though it never names that sibling 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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no alternative is named. An agent can only infer from the verb "Retrieve" that this is the read counterpart to the update sibling, which is a reasonable but unstated inference.

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