postiz-mcp

postiz_generate_video

Generate AI videos by sending provider-specific payload to Postiz video integration, with usage billed from your credit pool.

Instructions

Generate an AI video via POST /api/video/generate. COST IMPLICATION: video generation may bill against the configured Postiz video integration's credit pool. Requires enableWrite. Body shape is provider-specific — see Postiz video docs.

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": {
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "postiz_generate_video"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`body`	Yes	Free-form payload as expected by Postiz video integrations.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Apr 30, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description discloses cost implications and the need for write permission. It does not mention asynchronous behavior, rate limits, or success/error responses, leaving gaps in behavioral understanding.

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 extremely concise with two sentences covering purpose, cost, permissions, and body shape. Every sentence provides essential information with no redundancy.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the minimal input schema and lack of output schema, the description covers cost and permission but omits output format, synchronous/asynchronous behavior, and error handling. External documentation is referenced but the description itself is incomplete.

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?

The sole parameter 'body' is described in the schema as 'Free-form payload as expected by Postiz video integrations'. The description reinforces this as provider-specific and points to external docs, but adds little new semantic value beyond the schema's description.

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 clearly states 'Generate an AI video via POST /api/video/generate', specifying the verb (generate) and resource (AI video). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like postiz_create_post (social post) and postiz_upload_file (file upload).

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 description mentions cost implication and permission requirement (enableWrite), and advises consulting Postiz docs for provider-specific body shape. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives 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.