Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Creatomate MCP Server

Creatomate MCP Server

by thenavidm
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Create a project template

create_template
Destructive

Creates a confirmed v2 template by preserving native RenderScript source JSON and returning provider template metadata. Use it to store reusable template definitions with exact tags and account profiles, without starting a render.

Instructions

Confirmed current v2 template creation. Preserves native source JSON and returns provider template metadata; not a render.

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": {
      "name": "<name>",
      "source": "<source>"
    },
    "name": "create_template"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesNonempty template name.
tagsNoExact tags; comma inside one tag is rejected because the native list query is comma-separated.
sourceYesNative RenderScript object; consult the current guide. Not fully locally validated.
accountNoExact private project profile label; no inherited/global key fallback.
confirmNoMust be true for this exact user-requested mutation or paid render.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare the write/destructive/open-world/non-idempotent profile. The description adds genuinely new context: it preserves the native source JSON and returns provider template metadata rather than a render result, which helps since there is no output schema. It stops short of explaining the confirm requirement or side effects of creation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences are compact, but the first ('Confirmed current v2 template creation') is telegraphic overlap with the title, and the second crams three distinct facts into one clause. Compact but not cleanly front-loaded, and some phrasing earns no place.

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?

For a destructive, open-world, non-idempotent mutation with a nested object param and no output schema, the description is only partially adequate: it notes the returned provider metadata and that the source object is not fully locally validated, but omits confirm semantics and the v2 vs legacy template distinction.

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 carries parameter meaning; baseline is 3. 'Preserves native source JSON' loosely maps to the source param but adds no syntax or validation detail beyond what the schema states.

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+resource ('template creation') and explicitly distinguishes itself from render siblings with 'not a render.' However, the fragment 'Confirmed current v2 template creation' injects ambiguous jargon ('Confirmed', 'v2') that muddies rather than sharpens the purpose.

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?

The only routing cue is 'not a render,' which implicitly steers away from create_render/submit_render_batch. There is no guidance on when to use create_template vs update_template, nor any mention of prerequisites like the required confirm flag.

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