google-flow-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Create Flow project

flow_create_project

Create a new empty Google Flow project to start organizing AI video scenes, characters, or storyboards. Provide a title to initialize the project workspace.

Instructions

Create a new, empty Flow 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": {
      "title": "<title>"
    },
    "name": "flow_create_project"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`title`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 27, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Empty' hints at initial state, but nothing is said about required auth, whether the title must be unique, what is returned, or any follow-up step to populate the project. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage this is thin.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Concise, though arguably under-specified rather than efficiently trimmed.

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?

For a one-parameter creation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented required parameter, the description leaves the agent without the information needed to invoke it confidently.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool requires a 'title' parameter with 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions it or its constraints (format, uniqueness, length). With no schema text to fall back on, the description fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 clear verb and resource: 'Create a new, empty Flow project.' The 'empty' qualifier usefully scopes the operation, and the create-verb distinguishes it from the flow_get_project / flow_list_projects siblings. It does not, however, differentiate itself from the other creation siblings (create_character, create_scene).

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 when-to-use context, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives despite a crowded sibling set of creation tools. The agent must infer everything about when this tool is the right choice.

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