google-flow-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

flow_shot_update

Edit one shot's text, selected take, or final-cut trim; changing prompt or ingredients clears the keyframe so it regenerates next time.

Instructions

Change one shot: its text, which take is used, or where it is trimmed in the final cut.

Changing prompt or ingredients clears the keyframe so it is regenerated next time.

Args: shot: Shot number. prompt / action / duration / camera / dialogue / sound / ingredients: new values. select_take: Take number (1 = first) to use in flow_assemble. trim_start: Seconds to cut from the start of the take in the final cut (0 = none). trim_end: Second at which the take ends in the final cut (0 = until the end). project_name: Project to use (default: active project).

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": {
      "shot": "<shot>"
    },
    "name": "flow_shot_update"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`shot`	Yes
`sound`	No
`action`	No
`camera`	No
`prompt`	No
`dialogue`	No
`duration`	No
`trim_end`	No
`trim_start`	No
`ingredients`	No
`select_take`	No
`project_name`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.3Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full load and does disclose a genuinely non-obvious side effect: changing prompt or ingredients clears the keyframe and forces regeneration. Trim semantics (0 = none / 0 = until the end) are also spelled out. It stops short of stating whether unspecified fields are left untouched, whether edits are reversible, or what is returned.

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 operation and its side effect, then a compact Args block with no filler. Every line carries information an agent needs.

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 12-parameter mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers parameters and cascade behavior well, but says nothing about the result of the call or failure modes (e.g., nonexistent shot number). Adequate, not complete.

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 Args block is doing all the work, and it covers all twelve parameters with added meaning beyond bare titles: take numbering ('1 = first'), trim zero-values, and the default active project. Gaps remain for units on duration and the distinction between prompt and action.

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 opening sentence names a specific verb and resource ('Change one shot') and enumerates the editable dimensions: text, take selection, and trim placement in the final cut. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like flow_assemble or flow_storyboard_keyframes, but the operation is unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied rather than stated: editing an existing shot, as opposed to creating one via flow_generate_video or assembling via flow_assemble (referenced only parenthetically for select_take). There is no explicit guidance on when not to use this tool, or prerequisites such as whether the shot must already exist.

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