DreamLayer image tools

dreamlayer_events

Read-onlyIdempotent

Resume an interrupted image generation stream by providing the execution ID and last processed event ID to retrieve subsequent events without incurring another charge.

Instructions

Use to resume running work or a dropped stream without another generation charge. Requires execution_id; pass the last_event_id actually processed. Returns bounded events, status and recovery cursor. If still running or rate-limited, back off before polling again. Do not repeatedly call in a tight loop or submit replacement work.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`execution_id`	Yes	UUID of the execution, as returned by dreamlayer_generate.
`last_event_id`	No	Id of the last event you processed; events after it are returned. Omit to replay from the start.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`asset`	No
`error`	No
`events`	No
`status`	No
`question`	No
`execution_id`	No
`last_event_id`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedSep 24, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / execution_id / description

Added value: +"UUID of the execution, as returned by dreamlayer_generate."

addedInput schema / properties / last_event_id / description

Added value: +"Id of the last event you processed; events after it are returned. Omit to replay from the start."

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "asset": {
+      "type": [
+        "object",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "error": {
+      "properties": {
+        "execution_id": {
+          "type": [
+            "string",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        },
+        "idempotency_key": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "reason": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "request_id": {
+          "type": [
+            "string",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        },
+        "retryable": {
+          "type": "boolean"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "reason",
+        "retryable"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "events": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "execution_id": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "last_event_id": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "question": {
+      "type": [
+        "object",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv0.2.0Aug 25, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark it read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable behavioral context: no generation charge, bounded events, status and recovery cursor, backoff requirements, and polling prohibitions. This goes well beyond the annotations.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, then requirements, then behavioral constraints. Every sentence earns its place, and there is no redundant or filler content.

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?

Given only two parameters and an output schema, the description covers purpose, invocation requirements, return behavior, rate-limit handling, and anti-abuse guidance. Nothing an agent needs to call this tool correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful nuance by specifying that last_event_id should be the last event actually processed, and it clarifies the recovery-cursor relationship. This is more than a restatement of the schema.

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 states a specific purpose: resuming running work or a dropped stream without incurring another generation charge. It clearly identifies the resource (events) and distinguishes itself from generation by emphasizing no extra charge.

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?

It explicitly says when to use the tool, what to pass (execution_id and last_event_id actually processed), and when to back off (still running or rate-limited). It also gives a clear exclusion: do not call repeatedly in a tight loop or submit replacement work.

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

Deploy Server