Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Pavo 官网 MCP

Pavo 官网 MCP

by congliu1851-ui
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

读取剧本指定分集

pavo_script_get_episode
Read-onlyIdempotent

Verify project ownership before reading an episode's native script content and status, preventing cross-project misuse of episode IDs.

Instructions

核对项目归属后读取指定集的原生正文和状态，不能跨项目误用分集ID。

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>",
      "episode_id": "<episode_id>"
    },
    "name": "pavo_script_get_episode"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
episode_idYes
project_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by disclosing the ownership-check precondition and the cross-project ID hazard, but it says nothing about failure behavior, missing episodes, or scope of the returned body beyond what the output schema would show.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler: precondition, action, returned content, and the misuse constraint all appear in one pass. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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 two-parameter read-only tool with a full output schema and complete annotations, the description covers purpose, precondition, and the main misuse risk. Only the format of the returned native body and missing-episode behavior remain unstated, both minor given the output schema.

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 0%, so the description must carry the parameter burden. It does convey the critical semantic that episode_id is scoped under project_id and must not be used across projects, but it gives no format, ID convention, or source for either identifier.

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 names a specific verb and resource: read a single episode's native body text and status. That clearly distinguishes it from mutating siblings like pavo_script_update_episodes and episode-listing tools like pavo_script_list_storyboard_episodes, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It supplies a precondition (verify project ownership first) and a prohibition (do not reuse an episode ID across projects), which is useful usage context. However, it does not say when to choose this tool over the sibling episode-listing or storyboard tools, leaving selection partly implied by the read-only framing.

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