Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
agent-video-engine

agent-video-engine

by ferdy252
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

draft_apply

Commit the exact staged video edit as a new revision and reject stale drafts, preventing overwrites of newer work.

Instructions

Commit the exact staged edit as one new revision. Refuses stale drafts so it cannot overwrite newer work.

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": {
      "projectDir": "<projectDir>",
      "draftId": "<draftId>",
      "expectedRevision": "<expectedRevision>"
    },
    "name": "draft_apply"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
draftIdYes
projectDirYesAbsolute path of the local video project directory
expectedRevisionYesRevision returned by project_inspect. Prevents overwriting newer edits.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv3.0.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is mostly covered; the description adds genuinely new behavioral context — that applying creates exactly one new revision and that stale drafts are rejected as an optimistic-concurrency guard against overwriting newer work. This is consistent with destructiveHint=false since the operation is additive. It still omits whether the draft is consumed afterward.

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 with zero filler; the primary contract (commit staged edit as a revision) is front-loaded and the safety caveat follows. Nothing could be removed without losing meaning.

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?

For a 3-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the core contract but leaves two things an agent would want: what is returned (new revision id/number) and whether the draft is consumed or left in place after apply. Annotations cover the safety profile, so these omissions are the main remaining gap rather than a critical one.

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 67%: projectDir and expectedRevision are documented, draftId is not. The description's 'refuses stale drafts' reinforces the purpose of expectedRevision but adds no format, source, or lifecycle detail beyond the schema's own 'Revision returned by project_inspect. Prevents overwriting newer edits.' Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Commit the exact staged edit as one new revision.' An agent can distinguish this from draft_stage (which creates the draft) and edit_apply without opening the schema. It does not, however, name any sibling explicitly to sharpen the boundary.

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?

The phrase 'staged edit' implies the stage-then-apply workflow, and 'refuses stale drafts' signals a precondition, but there is no explicit when-to-use versus edit_apply, draft_stage, or revision_restore, and no statement of what a caller must do first (obtain expectedRevision from project_inspect).

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