Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AI-IDM MCP Server

AI-IDM MCP Server

by XinwangTao
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

download_hls

Download HLS (m3u8) streams and merge their segments into one file. Select master playlist bitrate, handle AES-128 encrypted fragments, and resume interrupted transfers.

Instructions

下载 HLS(m3u8) 并合并为单文件。支持 master 选码率、AES-128 加密分片、断点续传。

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": {
      "url": "<url>"
    },
    "name": "download_hls"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesm3u8 地址（master 或媒体列表）
proxyNo
outputNo
headersNo
qualityNobest / worst / 码率索引
restartNo
insecureNo
connectionsNo分片并发数，默认 8
keep_segmentsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses useful traits: AES-128 decryption is handled automatically, master playlists allow bitrate selection, and downloads are resumable. It does not state permission requirements, rate limits, or what happens on failure/partial output.

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 tightly packed sentences with no waste, and the core action is front-loaded ahead of the supporting capabilities.

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?

With 9 parameters, 33% coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is far too thin. Six parameters and the return/error behavior are left entirely unexplained for a fairly complex tool.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is only 33%, so the description must compensate. It hints at bitrate selection (quality) and resumability (restart), but proxy, output, headers, insecure, connections, and keep_segments are undocumented in both schema and description.

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 specific verb (下载/download), a specific resource (HLS/m3u8), and the outcome (合并为单文件/merge into a single file). It is clearly distinct from generic siblings like start_download, though it does not explicitly contrast them.

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?

The description lists supported features (master bitrate selection, AES-128, resumable) but gives no guidance on when to use this instead of start_download or other siblings, and no prerequisites or exclusions are stated.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools