Skip to main content
Glama
veniceai

Venice MCP Server

Official
by veniceai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Venice Video Retrieve / Status

venice_video_status
Idempotent

Check the status of a queued video job, returning JSON progress while processing and the completed MP4 or download URL when done.

Instructions

Check status of a queued video job. Returns JSON progress while PROCESSING. Completed jobs are either an embedded base64 video/mp4 MCP resource or a download_url resource link. For VPS / Grok Imagine Private models, retrieve returns COMPLETED JSON without a URL: this process reuses the queue-time download_url when venice_video_generate ran here, or accepts a Venice-host download_url argument. POST endpoint with body {model, queue_id}. Supports x402 wallet auth (no Venice account needed) and API key.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modelYesSame model id used to queue.
queue_idYesReturned by venice_video_generate.
download_urlNoQueue-time download_url from venice_video_generate. Must be an https Venice host. Needed for VPS / Grok Imagine Private only when this process did not queue the job (retrieve returns COMPLETED without a URL).
delete_media_on_completionNoDelete server-side media once an embedded MP4 has been buffered. Ignored for download_url results: download first, then call venice_video_complete.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.3.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / delete_media_on_completion / description
      Added value: +"Delete server-side media once an embedded MP4 has been buffered. Ignored for download_url results: download first, then call venice_video_complete."
    • addedInput schema / properties / download_url
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Queue-time download_url from venice_video_generate. Must be an https Venice host. Needed for VPS / Grok Imagine Private only when this process did not queue the job (retrieve returns COMPLETED without a URL).",
+  "format": "uri",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With annotations already declaring idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, the description adds real context: the POST endpoint and body shape, the different completion payload forms, VPS/Grok Imagine Private URL-reuse behavior, and that delete_media is ignored for download_url results. Auth modes (x402 wallet vs API key) are explicitly disclosed.

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?

The opening line is front-loaded and useful, but the VPS/Grok Imagine sentence is dense and hard to parse, and the endpoint/auth details read like implementation notes rather than agent-facing guidance.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description correctly takes on the burden of describing return values (in-progress JSON, embedded base64 MP4, or download_url link) and auth requirements. It covers most of what an agent needs, with minor gaps around polling cadence and the transition to venice_video_complete.

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 the schema descriptions already explain model, queue_id, download_url, and delete_media_on_completion in detail. The description largely restates those semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies despite the surrounding workflow context.

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 and resource: check status of a queued video job, with named return modes (JSON progress, base64 resource, download_url). It is clearly distinct from venice_video_generate, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with the sibling venice_video_complete.

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?

Usage is implied through the workflow (queue via venice_video_generate, then poll here; the VPS case explains when download_url matters). However, it never states when to use this versus venice_video_complete or when to stop polling, so the agent must infer the boundaries.

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