Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
reelsaw

reelsaw

by osbytes
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Export clips

export_project
Idempotent

Exports a project's rendered clips as a ZIP with YouTube/TikTok metadata and returns a downloadable or shareable link.

Instructions

A download link for a zip of the project's rendered clips with YouTube/TikTok metadata; a share link that needs no sign-in by default for connectors signed in through OAuth. Same conditions as the app's Export: the project live, at least one picked clip rendered, else the answer says why. Returns { url, shared, clips (rendered, in the zip), notRendered (picked, not finished, left out) }, plus { linkId, expiresAt } when shared; an unshared url needs this server's API key.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesProject id (from list_projects, search_clips or create_project)
shareNotrue = a share link that needs no sign-in (for downloading from your own shell); false = a link that needs this server's API key. Default: true when signed in through your MCP client (OAuth), whose token your shell does not hold; false with an API key
clipIdsNoOnly these clips (max 200; must be rendered clips of the project); omitted = every rendered clip

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.33.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / share
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "true = a share link that needs no sign-in (for downloading from your own shell); false = a link that needs this server's API key. Default: true when signed in through your MCP client (OAuth), whose token your shell does not hold; false with an API key",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.7.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / clipIds / description
      Added value: +"Only these clips (max 200; must be rendered clips of the project); omitted = every rendered clip"
    • addedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Added value: +"Project id (from list_projects, search_clips or create_project)"
  3. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations supply only idempotentHint, so the description carries the behavioral burden and does so thoroughly: it explains the auth model for share vs unshared links, that an unshared URL requires the server's API key, that the tool is scoped to rendered clips with picked-but-unfinished clips excluded, and what happens on precondition failure. This is exactly the context an agent needs before calling.

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?

The lead clause front-loads what the tool returns and there is no filler text. However, the second half is a dense run-on of parentheticals describing the return shape, which is harder to parse than a short bulleted or sentence-per-field structure would be.

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?

With no output schema, the description steps in and documents the return object field by field, including the conditional linkId/expiresAt when shared and the notRendered bucket. Combined with the stated preconditions and auth behavior, an agent has everything required to call this correctly and interpret the result.

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%, so all three parameters are already documented, including the share default logic and the clipIds 200-item cap. The description reinforces the share/auth implication ('an unshared url needs this server's API key') but adds little syntax or selection guidance beyond what the schema states, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

The description states a specific verb+resource: it produces a download link for a zip of the project's rendered clips, plus optionally a share link. That is concrete enough that an agent knows exactly what it gets back. It does not name or distinguish itself from the closest sibling, export_decisions, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

It gives preconditions (project live, at least one picked clip rendered) and says the answer explains failures, which is useful operational context. But it offers no when-to-use versus when-not guidance and never mentions export_decisions or any alternative for exporting decisions rather than clips, leaving the routing choice to inference.

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