Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Gemini MCP Server

Gemini MCP Server

by salviz
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

gemini_analyze_video

Analyze video files by providing a path and optional prompt to describe, summarize, or extract information using Gemini.

Instructions

Analyze a video file with Gemini (describe, summarize, extract info)

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": {
      "videoPath": "<videoPath>"
    },
    "name": "gemini_analyze_video"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modelNoModel name (default: gemini-3.1-pro-preview)
promptNoPrompt for video analysis (default: Describe what happens in this video)
videoPathYesAbsolute path to the video file

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so the description must carry the burden. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as destructiveness, authentication needs, rate limits, or output format. The description is too minimal.

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?

The description is a single short sentence that directly states the tool's purpose with no redundancy. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return values, error handling, prerequisites (e.g., file must exist), or limitations. More context is needed for an agent to use this tool effectively.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds context about possible tasks (describe, summarize, extract info) but does not add detailed parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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?

The description 'Analyze a video file with Gemini (describe, summarize, extract info)' clearly states the action (analyze), the resource (video file), and the possible operations. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like analyze_audio or analyze_image.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., analyze_youtube, analyze_url). It only describes what the tool does without specifying context or when not to use it.

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