ffmpeg-mcp

cut_video

Extract a segment from a video file by specifying start time and duration.

Instructions

Extract a segment from a video file

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": {
      "inputPath": "<inputPath>",
      "outputPath": "<outputPath>",
      "startTime": "<startTime>",
      "duration": "<duration>"
    },
    "name": "cut_video"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`duration`	Yes	Duration (e.g., '00:00:30' or '30')
`inputPath`	Yes	Path to input video file
`startTime`	Yes	Start time (e.g., '00:01:30' or '90')
`outputPath`	Yes	Path for output video file

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.2Jun 25, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the action without disclosing behavioral traits such as file handling (non-destructive due to input/output paths), codec support, or error responses. The minimal description fails to inform the agent of important behaviors.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. It efficiently communicates the core purpose.

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

Completeness2/5

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

The description lacks context about return values, success criteria, or limitations (e.g., supported video formats). With 4 required parameters and no output schema, the agent needs more information to invoke the tool correctly, such as expected output format or error handling.

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 100%, providing descriptions for all 4 parameters. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as format examples or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the schema coverage.

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?

The description 'Extract a segment from a video file' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly identifying the tool's function. It distinguishes itself from siblings like concat_videos, convert, and remove_silence by focusing on segment extraction.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it specify prerequisites or limitations. The agent must infer context from the sibling list without explicit guidance.

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

Deploy Server