Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Pavo 官网 MCP

Pavo 官网 MCP

by congliu1851-ui
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

读取原生制作分集列表

pavo_script_list_storyboard_episodes
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve production storyboard episode lists for a Pavo project using its project ID, without mistaking progress draft episode IDs for production episode IDs. Read-only; no generation.

Instructions

读取官网projects/{id}/episodes/storyboard制作分集，不把progress中的剧本草稿分集ID猜作制作分集ID。只读，不生成。

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>"
    },
    "name": "pavo_script_list_storyboard_episodes"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so '只读，不生成' largely restates structured data. The one genuine addition is the caveat about not guessing production episode IDs from progress drafts, which tells the agent the returned IDs are authoritative — but nothing is said about list size, pagination, or what happens when no storyboard exists yet.

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?

Two short sentences: the positive definition first, then the guardrail, then the read-only note. Every clause carries information and nothing is padded.

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?

With an output schema present, return-shape detail is not required, and a single required parameter keeps the surface small. The description is nearly complete for this complexity, with only minor gaps around obtaining the project_id and whether an empty storyboard is an error or an empty list.

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% for the single parameter, so the schema alone gives no meaning. The description partially compensates by framing project_id as the path component in projects/{id}/episodes/storyboard, but it adds no format, source, or lookup guidance for obtaining a valid project_id.

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?

The description states a specific verb (读取/read) and a specific resource (storyboard 制作分集), and anchors it to the endpoint projects/{id}/episodes/storyboard. It also disambiguates the resource semantically: these are production episodes, not the draft episode IDs found in progress, which separates it from episode-editing siblings like pavo_script_update_episodes.

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?

Usage is implied by the resource and by the negative instruction not to infer production episode IDs from draft IDs in progress, which is a useful anti-pattern warning. However, no sibling is named as an alternative (e.g., pavo_script_get_episode for a single episode), and there is no explicit 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