Skip to main content
Glama

render_take

Starts a full render of the next numbered take—frames, voice, SFX, music, normalized mix, thumbnail, contact sheet, and QC—then returns a job to poll via job_status.

Instructions

Start a full render of the next numbered take: frames, voice, sound effects, music, loudness-normalized mix, thumbnail, contact sheet and QC. Takes minutes; poll job_status.

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": {
      "slug": "<slug>"
    },
    "name": "render_take"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYesepisode slug, e.g. the-cursed-tape (or an example slug for read-only tools)
draftNosilent preview with estimated timings, no ElevenLabs

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does a solid job: it discloses duration ('takes minutes'), asynchrony (poll job_status), the full artifact set produced, and that 'draft' is a silent preview avoiding ElevenLabs. Minor gaps remain, such as overwrite behavior or whether a take must be picked first.

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?

Two compact sentences, front-loaded with the action and artifact list, followed by the key timing/polling instruction. No filler.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a heavy async pipeline tool with no output schema, the description covers what gets produced and how to track progress, which is the essential missing piece. A mention of prerequisite state (e.g., needing a take to exist) would close the remaining gap.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both 'slug' and 'draft' are already documented, including default false and the ElevenLabs caveat. The description adds little beyond implying which take is rendered; baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 description uses a specific verb (start a full render) and resource (the next numbered take), then enumerates the produced artifacts (frames, voice, mix, thumbnail, QC). This clearly separates it from smaller siblings like render_stills or qc_take, though it doesn't explicitly name those alternatives.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives concrete operational guidance: 'takes minutes; poll job_status,' which tells the agent this is async and points to the correct follow-up tool. It doesn't state when NOT to use it (e.g., use render_stills for a quick preview), so it falls short of a full 5.

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