Skip to main content
Glama

render_frames

Destructive

Render frames through a Nuke Write node: preview with confirm false, then run with confirm true; async returns task_id for polling, or set synchronous to block.

Instructions

Render frames through a Write node.

By default this returns immediately with a task_id and runs the render in the background; poll tasks_get(task_id) for progress, tasks_cancel to interrupt, or wait for the terminal state notification.

Pass synchronous=True to keep the pre-B2 blocking shape (returns the full RenderResult once the render finishes). That path is wire-compatible with existing callers.

Args: write_node: name of Write node. uses first Write in script if omitted. first_frame: start frame. uses script range if omitted. last_frame: end frame. uses script range if omitted. confirm: must be True to render. call with False to preview. synchronous: block until done and return RenderResult (B2 back-compat). Defaults to False -- use the async Task flow.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confirmNomust be True to render. call with False to preview.
last_frameNoend frame. uses script range if omitted.
write_nodeNoname of Write node. uses first Write in script if omitted.
first_frameNostart frame. uses script range if omitted.
synchronousNoblock until done and return ``RenderResult`` (B2 back-compat). Defaults to False -- use the async Task flow.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
errorsNo
renderedNo
average_fpsNo
frames_writtenNo
duration_secondsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare openWorldHint and destructiveHint; the description adds substantial behavior beyond them: default async execution returning a task_id, background rendering, a terminal-state notification, the blocking synchronous alternative and its return type, and the confirm-must-be-True safety gate. This is exactly the kind of operational detail annotations cannot convey.

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?

Front-loads the core action and the async/sync distinction before the Args list, which is well ordered. The Args section largely re-states the schema and the mid-sentence back-compat parentheticals add slight bloat, but overall it reads efficiently.

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

Completeness5/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description fully covers the async/sync execution models, polling/interruption path, and the confirm preview gate. Nothing essential to correct invocation is missing.

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 100% and the Args block essentially repeats the schema descriptions verbatim (write_node, first_frame, last_frame, confirm, synchronous). The confirm semantics and default ranges are clarified well but duplicated, so the description adds little beyond what the schema already provides.

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 verb ('Render') and resource ('frames through a Write node'), and the first sentence immediately establishes scope. An agent can distinguish it from configuration siblings like setup_write or traversal tools like find_nodes without opening the 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?

Explicitly explains the default async behavior and when to use the synchronous path (pre-B2 blocking shape, wire-compatible). It names the follow-up tools (tasks_get for polling, tasks_cancel to interrupt) and the confirm gate for preview vs. render, giving clear operational context, though it never compares itself to a sibling tool or states when not to render through this path.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.