Distributed Video QA MCP

List jobs

video_jobs

Read-only

Lists recent video download and ingest jobs, newest first, with options to limit results or show only queued and running jobs.

Instructions

Recent download and ingest jobs, newest first.

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": "video_jobs"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	Most jobs to return.
`active_only`	No	Only queued and running jobs.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`jobs`	Yes	Newest first.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.0Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and closed-world scope, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful order (newest first) and the job categories covered (download and ingest), but says nothing about snapshot behavior, pagination, or truncation beyond the default limit, which the schema already carries.

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?

One short sentence with no filler, and the ordering constraint is front-loaded where it matters most. Every word earns its place.

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?

The tool is a simple, read-only two-parameter list with a full output schema and complete parameter descriptions elsewhere, so the description need only state what is listed and in what order. It does that, though it could say whether results are capped or whether the list spans all workspaces.

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 coverage is 100%, with both limit and active_only fully documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning about how limit interacts with recency or how active_only maps to queued/running states beyond what the schema states.

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 resource (download and ingest jobs) and a behavior (newest first), so the agent knows this is a list of recent jobs rather than a single job or a status probe. It does not explicitly contrast with the singular video_job sibling, so it stops short of full differentiation.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative. The word "recent" hints at scope, but the agent must infer whether to call video_job, video_status, or this tool for a given need.

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