NotebookLM MCP

Create Video Overview

video_overview_create

Create a narrated visual explainer for a notebook's sources, with configurable format, language, focus, and style. Requires confirmation before generation; poll status until ready.

Instructions

Start generating a Video Overview: a narrated video with visuals that explains the notebook's sources. Uses the user's NotebookLM quota and takes several minutes, so agree on the options with the user first: with confirm=false it does nothing and returns pending_confirmation. With confirm=true it returns the artifact_id; poll studio_status until that artifact is completed. Once completed, studio_status gives a video download_url.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`format`	No	Format: brief, explainer
`confirm`	Yes	Must be true to start generation. With false the tool only returns pending_confirmation and does nothing
`language`	No	BCP-47 language code such as en, es or fr; omit for NotebookLM's default
`source_ids`	No	Limit generation to these source IDs (from notebook_get); omit to use every source in the notebook
`notebook_id`	Yes	Notebook ID, as returned by notebook_list or notebook_create
`focus_prompt`	No	Optional instruction on what to focus on or emphasise, e.g. "the methodology section"
`visual_style`	No	Visual style: anime, auto_select, classic, custom, heritage, kawaii, paper_craft, retro_print, watercolor, whiteboard

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`status`	Yes
`message`	No	Human-readable outcome or next step
`artifact_id`	No	ID of the new artifact, as listed by studio_status

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.5.0Oct 20, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "artifact_id": {
+      "description": "ID of the new artifact, as listed by studio_status",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "message": {
+      "description": "Human-readable outcome or next step",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "enum": [
+        "success",
+        "pending_confirmation"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "status"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed6 schema fields changedv0.4.0Oct 20, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / confirm / description

Previous value: -"Must be true to start generation"New value: +"Must be true to start generation. With false the tool only returns pending_confirmation and does nothing"

changedInput schema / properties / focus_prompt / description

Previous value: -"Focus prompt"New value: +"Optional instruction on what to focus on or emphasise, e.g. \"the methodology section\""

changedInput schema / properties / language / description

Previous value: -"BCP-47 language code"New value: +"BCP-47 language code such as en, es or fr; omit for NotebookLM's default"

changedInput schema / properties / notebook_id / description

Previous value: -"The notebook ID"New value: +"Notebook ID, as returned by notebook_list or notebook_create"

changedInput schema / properties / source_ids / description

Previous value: -"Source IDs (omit for all)"New value: +"Limit generation to these source IDs (from notebook_get); omit to use every source in the notebook"

changedInput schema / properties / visual_style / description

Previous value: -"Style: anime, auto_select, classic, custom, heritage, kawaii, paper_craft, retro_print, watercolor, whiteboard"New value: +"Visual style: anime, auto_select, classic, custom, heritage, kawaii, paper_craft, retro_print, watercolor, whiteboard"

First observedv0.3.1Aug 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false), and the description adds substantial context beyond them: it consumes the user's NotebookLM quota, takes several minutes, confirm=false is a true no-op returning pending_confirmation, and confirm=true returns an artifact_id to be polled. This is exactly the operational detail an agent needs before committing.

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 dense sentences with no filler: the outcome first, then the confirmation protocol, then the polling/download path. Every clause carries operational value and the confirm semantics are front-loaded.

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?

For a long-running, quota-consuming generation tool, the description supplies the full lifecycle (confirm gate, artifact_id, polling, download_url) even though an output schema exists. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all seven parameters including enums for format, visual_style, and language. The description only elaborates on confirm, which the schema already explains, so it adds little parameter meaning beyond the structured fields.

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 and resource ('Start generating a Video Overview: a narrated video with visuals that explains the notebook's sources'), which clearly distinguishes it from audio_overview_create, slide_deck_create, and infographic_create without opening any 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?

Gives explicit operating context: agree on options with the user first, use confirm=false for a dry run, and poll studio_status after confirm=true. It routes the agent to the right follow-up tool, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with the sibling overview/deck creators when choosing output medium.

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