Skip to main content
Glama

Infos d'un média

montage_infos
Read-only

Inspects media files for duration, size, ratio, fps, codecs, and audio, then flags deviations from TikTok's 1080×1920 H.264/AAC 30fps format; without a file, checks ffmpeg installation and safe zones.

Instructions

Durée, taille, ratio, images/s, codecs et son d'une vidéo, d'une image ou d'un son (ffprobe), et ce qui l'écarte du format TikTok (1080×1920, H.264/AAC, 30 i/s). Sans fichier : dit si ffmpeg est installé (et comment l'installer sinon) et rappelle les zones sûres.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "montage_infos"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fichierNoChemin du média. Vide : état de ffmpeg seulement.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description is consistent with that (pure inspection via ffprobe). It adds useful context beyond annotations: the ffmpeg dependency, the install hint, and the dual-mode behavior when no file is given. It does not cover error behavior for a missing/invalid path, which matters for a tool taking an arbitrary path.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the reported fields and followed by the no-argument mode; every clause carries information. The parenthetical '(ffprobe)' and the explicit format specs make it dense but not padded.

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?

With no output schema, the description takes on the return-value burden and does so by listing the fields produced. It also explains the empty-argument mode. It lacks any note on failure handling (unreadable path, unsupported container), which is the main 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?

There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description's 'Sans fichier : …' clause mirrors what the schema already states ('Vide : état de ffmpeg seulement'), so it adds little new meaning about the parameter itself.

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 names the exact resource (a video, image or sound file) and enumerates the concrete properties reported: duration, size, ratio, fps, codecs, audio, plus deviations from the TikTok format. It also distinguishes a second mode (no file → ffmpeg status and safe zones), which separates it cleanly from siblings such as montage_format_tiktok.

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?

Usage is clearly framed: pass a file to inspect a media, omit it to check whether ffmpeg is installed and get the safe-zone reminder. There is no explicit 'when not to use' or named alternative among the montage_* siblings, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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