Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Pavo 官网 MCP

Pavo 官网 MCP

by congliu1851-ui
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

导出剧本和分镜到本地

pavo_script_export
Idempotent

Export native script content to an absolute directory as JSON, Markdown, or Word-compatible HTML, optionally including storyboard data, and return file SHA and status.

Instructions

读取原生剧本内容后导出到绝对目录，支持json/markdown/doc。doc为与官网同类的Word兼容HTML，不冒称DOCX。可附原生分镜数据，返回SHA和状态；不会触发生成、视频导出或覆盖不同内容的文件。

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": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>",
      "output_dir": "<output_dir>"
    },
    "name": "pavo_script_export"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
formatNomarkdown
output_dirYes
project_idYes
include_storyboardsNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: it explains that 'doc' is Word-compatible HTML rather than a real DOCX, that it will not overwrite files whose content differs, that it returns a SHA and status, and that it does not trigger downstream generation or export. These are exactly the non-obvious side effects an agent needs given readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true.

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?

A tight, front-loaded passage where each clause adds a distinct fact (formats, doc caveat, storyboard option, return values, excluded side effects). It is dense rather than padded, though the single flowing sentence chain is slightly harder to scan than separated clauses would be.

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?

For a 4-parameter export tool with an output schema already describing return values, the description supplies the remaining essentials: accepted formats, the output directory constraint, optional storyboard inclusion, file-overwrite safety, and explicit exclusion of generation/video side effects. Nothing needed to invoke it 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?

With 0% schema description coverage the description must carry the load, and it does: it clarifies that output_dir must be an absolute directory, enumerates the accepted format values (json/markdown/doc) with a caveat on doc, and explains include_storyboards as attaching native storyboard data. Only project_id is left unglossed.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('读取原生剧本内容后导出到绝对目录') plus the supported output formats, so its scope is unambiguous. It also distinguishes itself from nearby write-like siblings by declaring it does not trigger generation or video export.

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?

Implicitly makes clear this is the tool for saving script content and optional storyboards to local disk, and rules out generation/video-export use cases. It does not name a concrete alternative (e.g. task-result download tools) or state prerequisites such as authentication, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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