vimeo-mcp

Apply embed preset

apply_embed_preset

Idempotent

Applies a saved embed preset to a video so its player matches your branding. Use preset_id from list_embed_presets to update player appearance.

Instructions

Apply a saved embed preset to a video, so its player matches your branding.

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": {
      "video_id": "<video_id>",
      "preset_id": "<preset_id>"
    },
    "name": "apply_embed_preset"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`video_id`	Yes	Video id.
`preset_id`	Yes	Preset id, from list_embed_presets.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv2.0.0Oct 6, 2026
- removedInput schema / $schema
```
Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
```
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
First observedv1.0.1Sep 1, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety and repeatability profile is covered. The description adds the branding effect, which is useful context, but says nothing about permissions, whether an existing preset is replaced, or what failure looks like.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the action and the outcome; nothing is wasted or redundant.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple two-parameter tool with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the description is nearly sufficient. Only minor gaps remain, such as what happens if a preset is already applied or whether the operation requires ownership rights.

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% and both parameters are documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning about video_id or preset_id beyond what the schema already 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?

The description gives a specific verb and resource ('Apply a saved embed preset to a video') and even states the effect ('player matches your branding'). It is clearly distinct from sibling list_embed_presets, though it never names that sibling directly.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisite statement. The link to list_embed_presets appears only in the schema parameter description, not in the tool description, so usage must be inferred.

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