Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Pavo 官网 MCP

Pavo 官网 MCP

by congliu1851-ui
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

查询短剧片段视频任务

pavo_script_get_segment_video_task
Read-onlyIdempotent

Queries segment video generation task status from native segment history without calling canvas get_task, and only treats confirmed success or failure as terminal.

Instructions

从本片段原生segment_video历史匹配generation_task_id查询状态，不调用画布get_task。仅已核success/failed作终态判断；未知状态、历史暂缺、运行超5分钟都不能自动重提。失败重试另用明确授权的提交工具。

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>",
      "segment_id": "<segment_id>",
      "task_id": "<task_id>"
    },
    "name": "pavo_script_get_segment_video_task"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
task_idYes
episode_idYes
project_idYes
segment_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish this as a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive call, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful policy beyond that: which states are terminal, a five-minute staleness threshold, and an explicit prohibition on auto-resubmission. Return shape is not described, but an output schema exists to carry that.

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?

Dense and front-loaded: the scope-defining statement comes first, followed by state and resubmission rules with no filler. The conditional clauses are packed but each carries a distinct constraint.

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 read-only status-polling tool with an output schema, the essential behavioral rules are present: state semantics, staleness handling, and resubmission policy. The missing piece is parameter meaning, which matters given the 0% schema coverage on four required IDs.

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 description coverage is 0% across four required parameters, so the description carries the full burden and does not meet it. It never clarifies the roles of project_id, episode_id, segment_id, or task_id, and the relationship between task_id and the mentioned generation_task_id is left ambiguous.

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: query the status of a segment video task by matching generation_task_id from this segment's native segment_video history. It explicitly rules out the canvas get_task path, so an agent can distinguish it from pavo_get_task and from pavo_script_submit_segment_video.

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?

Gives clear when/when-not guidance: only verified success/failed count as terminal, and unknown status, missing history, or runtime over five minutes must not trigger a resubmit. It routes retries to the authorized submit tool, though it names that sibling only descriptively ("明确授权的提交工具") rather than by tool name.

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