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

agent-video-engine

by ferdy252
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

media_relink

Relinks moved video project source files by exact saved fingerprint and applies all missing-asset replacements in one atomic batch, rejecting different source bytes.

Instructions

Relink moved source files by exact saved fingerprint. Supply all missing assets in one atomic batch. Never accepts different source bytes as the same original.

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>",
      "expectedRevision": "<expectedRevision>",
      "replacements": "<replacements>"
    },
    "name": "media_relink"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectDirYesAbsolute path of the local video project directory
replacementsYes
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?

Adds real behavior beyond the annotations: the operation is an atomic all-or-nothing batch, and matching is by exact fingerprint so differing bytes are rejected. These are important semantics not present in readOnlyHint/destructiveHint/openWorldHint. It does not say what happens to the whole batch when one fingerprint fails, nor what the call returns.

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?

Three short sentences, each carrying a distinct constraint (matching rule, batching rule, rejection rule), with the core action front-loaded and zero 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?

For a mutation tool with no output schema, the definition covers the matching and atomicity semantics but omits failure behavior (partial mismatch handling), return value or revision bump, and how it relates to project_inspect beyond the schema note. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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%, with projectDir and expectedRevision documented in the schema. The description adds meaning for the undocumented 'replacements' array by framing it as 'all missing assets in one atomic batch', implying it must be exhaustive and matched by fingerprint. It never explains assetId-vs-path pairing within each item, so compensation is partial.

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 ('Relink moved source files') plus the matching mechanism ('exact saved fingerprint'), which clearly distinguishes it from media_add/media_index style tools. It stops short of naming any sibling explicitly, so the differentiation is inferred from semantics rather than declared.

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 'moved source files' and 'Supply all missing assets in one atomic batch' implies the triggering situation (assets relocated on disk, multiple missing at once). There is no explicit when-not guidance, no mention of what to do for brand-new assets (presumably media_add), and no statement of prerequisites beyond the schema's expectedRevision.

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