Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
FFmpeg-v2 MCP Server

FFmpeg-v2 MCP Server

by developerjillur
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

ffv2_plan

Read-onlyIdempotent

Plan a typed media job by retrieving exact FFmpeg argv, expected output, resource estimates, and warnings before execution.

Instructions

Typed media job-এর exact argv, expected output, resource estimate ও warning দেখুন।

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": {
      "spec": "<spec>"
    },
    "name": "ffv2_plan"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
specYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.6.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the response includes argv, resource estimates, and warnings, but never states the crucial behavioral fact that nothing is executed — which is the main thing distinguishing this from ffv2_submit.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the most important outcome (exact argv) and free of filler. It is efficient, though it leans so terse that useful detail was omitted rather than trimmed.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a tool with a large nested schema at 0% coverage, nine operation types, and no annotation explaining execution semantics, a single sentence is inadequate. It does not explain what 'resource estimate' covers, when warnings appear, or that the result is a preview only; the existence of an output schema excuses it from describing return values but not from orienting the agent.

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% and the single 'spec' parameter is a nested object with roughly 45 undocumented properties (operation enum, tracks, encoder settings, HDR policy, etc.). The phrase 'typed media job' hints that the spec is a typed job object, but the description adds no meaning about how to populate these fields or which are valid per operation.

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 ('দেখুন' / view) and a specific set of outputs: exact argv, expected output, resource estimate, and warnings for a typed media job. This clearly distinguishes a planning/dry-run tool from execution siblings like ffv2_submit, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no statement of when to use this versus ffv2_submit or ffv2_probe, and no prerequisite context such as 'call this before submitting to preview the command.' The 'plan' framing implies a dry-run workflow, but the agent must infer it entirely.

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