Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
gemini-pro-mcp

gemini-pro-mcp

by Muzaqil555
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

video_stitch

Join local video clips in order into one MP4, merging same-format clips losslessly and re-encoding mixed formats to H.264/AAC. Saves the combined file to the configured output directory.

Instructions

Join local video clips, in the given order, into one .mp4 with ffmpeg. Runs on this computer and costs nothing. Clips with the same format (e.g. all from video_generate or Flow) are joined losslessly; mixed formats are re-encoded to H.264/AAC. Use it to combine clips made by video_generate, video_edit or flow_collect; flow_make_video already joins its own clips.

    Args:
        clips: Paths of the clips, first to last (at least one).
        file_name: Name for the joined file, saved in GEMINI_PRO_OUTPUT_DIR; a
            number is added if it already exists.

    Returns:
        "Saved: <path>" with the joined video, or an error such as a missing clip.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
clipsYes
file_nameNostitched

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: discloses local execution with no cost, that same-format clips are joined losslessly while mixed formats are re-encoded to H.264/AAC, that output lands in GEMINI_PRO_OUTPUT_DIR, and that a numeric suffix is appended on filename collision. It does not mention failure/partial-output behavior when a clip mid-list is corrupt or unsupported, which is the main residual gap for a write-producing tool.

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 with the core action in the first sentence, followed by behavior, then routing guidance, then compact Args/Returns sections. Given the 0% schema coverage, the parameter lines are load-bearing rather than redundant, and no sentence is filler.

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?

Despite an output schema existing, the description still sketches the return string ('Saved: <path>' or an error), and it covers cost, encoding strategy, output location, and sibling boundaries. For a two-parameter local tool, an agent has everything needed 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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, and it largely does: clips are paths in first-to-last order with a minimum of one, and file_name is saved into GEMINI_PRO_OUTPUT_DIR with collision-avoidance renaming. It stops short of specifying accepted input formats or whether paths must be absolute, which would fully close the gap.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Join local video clips ... into one .mp4 with ffmpeg') plus ordering semantics, so the operation is unmistakable. It also distinguishes itself from flow_make_video, which already joins its own clips, and names the sibling producers whose output it consumes.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly names the upstream tools whose clips it should combine (video_generate, video_edit, flow_collect) and gives a clear exclusion ('flow_make_video already joins its own clips'). Both the when-to-use and when-not-to-use conditions are stated rather than implied.

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