Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
H3 Cloud MCP

H3 Cloud MCP

by lst016
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

h3_art_download_video

Download a completed H3 MP4 by task ID into H3_OUTPUT_DIR to retrieve the generated video output.

Instructions

Download a completed managed H3 MP4 into H3_OUTPUT_DIR.

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": {
      "task_id": "<task_id>"
    },
    "name": "h3_art_download_video"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
task_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the key side effect: a file is written into H3_OUTPUT_DIR. It omits what happens if the task is not complete, overwrite behavior, and whether anything is returned, which are meaningful gaps for a file-writing operation.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the destination is placed where it matters.

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?

No annotations, no output schema, an undocumented required parameter, and an unresolved overlap with h3_download_video. For a file-producing tool, the definition leaves too much for the agent to infer.

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 description says nothing about task_id. The agent must guess that it is the identifier of a completed job; the 'completed' wording gives a weak hint about preconditions but no format or source of the ID.

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 (download) and resource (a completed managed H3 MP4) plus the destination (H3_OUTPUT_DIR), so the action is unambiguous. However, it does not distinguish itself from the near-identical sibling h3_download_video, leaving the 'art' variant's role unclear.

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 word 'completed' implies the task must have finished, which is useful implied guidance, but there is no explicit instruction to check status first (e.g. via h3_art_job_status) and no routing between this and h3_download_video. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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