Skip to main content
Glama
unifically-dev

UnificAlly MCP Server

Official
by unifically-dev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Edit video

edit_video
Destructive

Modify an existing clip with a text prompt, or transfer motion from a reference video onto a subject image. Returns the edited video URL.

Instructions

Edit an existing video from a prompt, or transfer motion onto a subject image. Pass the source in video_url and the change in prompt. Defaults to Google Gemini Omni video edit; switch with model ('kling-edit', 'wan-edit', or 'motion-control' for Kling motion transfer with a subject image in image_urls). This is for changing an existing clip — to make a new video from scratch use generate_video, to extend one use extend_video, to upscale use upscale_media. Returns the video URL.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
seedNoOptional seed for reproducible output. Same seed + same input gives the same result on supported models.
waitNoDefault true: wait for the job and return the finished result. Set false to get the task_id back immediately and poll with get_task — use for long jobs (high-quality video, full songs) or when the connection might time out.
modelNoEdit model, alias or full id. Aliases: 'video-edit' (default, Gemini Omni), 'kling-edit', 'wan-edit', 'motion-control' (Kling motion transfer). See list_models (category video, the *-edit / motion-control ids).
promptYesWhat to change — the edit instruction (e.g. 'make it snow', 'turn day into night', 'apply this motion to the subject').
video_urlYesThe source video to edit (or the reference/control video for motion transfer). Must be a public https URL — never a local path, never inline base64. For a local file, upload it first with a direct PUT to files.unifically.com/upload and pass the returned file_url.
image_urlsNoOptional reference/subject images (each a public https URL) — used by motion-control (the subject to animate) and omni edit models. The max count is per-model.
aspect_ratioNoOptional output aspect ratio, if the model supports it.
callback_urlNoOptional webhook URL. When set, the tool returns immediately with the task_id and UnificAlly POSTs the result to this URL when the task finishes. Webhook body: { task_id, status: 'completed'|'failed', data: { video_url | image_url | audio_url | ... }, error_message? } — note the media arrives under 'data', not 'output'. Use for long jobs instead of waiting.
confirm_costNoOnly relevant if the operator enabled a spend guard. When a call exceeds the configured confirm threshold it returns a quote; retry with confirm_cost: true to proceed. Safe to ignore otherwise.
provider_optionsNoEscape hatch for model-specific fields not exposed as named parameters (e.g. Kling multi_shots, Flux steps). Merged into the API 'input' payload. Rejected: fields the tool already manages (prompt, media URLs, task_id, ...) and reserved routing/billing/auth keys (model, callback_url, dry_run, api_key, authorization) — switch models with the 'model' parameter, not here. See https://docs.unifically.com for per-model fields.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare a non-read-only, destructive, non-idempotent, open-world write, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the default model and the return value ('Returns the video URL'), but says nothing about credit spend, per-model constraints on image_urls count, or what makes the operation destructive. Useful but thin beyond the annotations.

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?

Four dense sentences, front-loaded with the core action and routing before the return value. Every sentence carries information, though the model-alias list and the sibling list together make it longer than strictly necessary for a tool whose schema already documents model aliases.

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 10-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the two operating modes, the routing alternatives, the default model, and the return value. It does not address long-job/polling behavior or cost confirmation, but those live in the schema parameter descriptions, so the agent has enough to call correctly.

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 baseline is 3. The description reinforces the two required parameters ('Pass the source in video_url and the change in prompt') and ties image_urls to motion-control, but adds no format, syntax, or constraint detail beyond the schema's own descriptions.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Edit an existing video') and covers the two distinct modes (prompt edit vs. motion transfer onto a subject image). It explicitly names the siblings it is not (generate_video, extend_video, upscale_media), so an agent can route without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives explicit when-to-use routing against three named alternatives, plus the intra-tool choice of model ('kling-edit', 'wan-edit', 'motion-control') and the condition that selects motion-control (subject image in image_urls). Nothing is left 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