Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Pavo 官网 MCP

Pavo 官网 MCP

by congliu1851-ui
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

提交剧情由Pavo生成分集

pavo_script_import_text
Idempotent

Submits an unsplit story as requirements so Pavo can generate a script and plan each episode from a specified title, style, ratio, and episode count, returning only the real creation receipt.

Instructions

把未分集的剧情作为requirements交给官网AI生成剧本，由Pavo安排每集内容，不再走完整剧本paste解析。planned_episode_count为用户指定的1至100集，官网接口不支持省略；连同标题及分集说明最多100000个UTF-16单位，不截断原文。可能消耗额度，需本次生成授权；只返回真实创建回执，不自动确认大纲或启动媒体。

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": {
      "raw_text": "<raw_text>",
      "title": "<title>",
      "ratio": "<ratio>",
      "style": "<style>",
      "operation_id": "<operation_id>",
      "planned_episode_count": "<planned_episode_count>"
    },
    "name": "pavo_script_import_text"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ratioYes
styleYes
titleYes
raw_textYes
operation_idYes
planned_episode_countYes

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 declare openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, yet the description still adds real value: quota may be consumed, per-generation authorization is required, the source text is never truncated, and the call only returns a creation receipt without auto-confirming the outline or starting media. Those post-call boundaries are exactly what the annotations cannot convey. It stops short of failure/partial-success behavior.

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 single dense block, but front-loaded with purpose followed by constraints, and every clause carries operational weight (limits, quota, authorization, return semantics). It could be split for readability but contains no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return shape need not be described. However, for a six-required-parameter creation tool with nested style and no schema descriptions, leaving ratio, style and operation_id unexplained is a real completeness gap given the sibling pavo_script_list_styles exists to supply style values.

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 0% across six required parameters, so the description must carry the load. It does explain planned_episode_count (user-supplied 1-100, mandatory because the upstream API cannot omit it) and the size budget shared by raw_text plus title and episode notes. But ratio, the nested style object, and operation_id are left completely undefined, so three of six parameters remain opaque.

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 action: hand an un-episoded storyline in as requirements so the official-site AI writes the screenplay and Pavo allocates per-episode content. It explicitly contrasts itself with the 'full screenplay paste/parse' path, which is what a sibling like pavo_script_import_file would do, so an agent can separate the two without opening either schema.

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 a clear selection rule: use this when the input is un-divided storyline rather than a complete screenplay to be parsed. It also flags that generation authorization must be in place. It does not name the alternative tool explicitly, so the routing hint stays implicit rather than enumerated.

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