VideoGen MCP

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Prompt to video

prompt_to_video_clip

Generate a short AI video clip from a text prompt inside an editable project. Set aspect ratio, duration, quality, and reference images as needed.

Instructions

Generate one short AI video clip from a prompt inside an editable project.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`prompt`	Yes	Description of the short video clip.
`quality`	No	Video generation quality. Omit to use workspace settings.
`autoExport`	No	When true (the default), the run stays in progress until an MP4 is ready. Use downloadUrl from the result. Set false only if you will call remix_project and then export_project yourself.
`aspectRatio`	No	Output aspect ratio as width:height units (not pixels). Example: { width: 16, height: 9 }.
`imageFileIds`	No	Optional reference image file ids.
`durationSeconds`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`error`	No	Error details when status is failed; otherwise null.
`status`	No	Job status: pending, running, succeeded, failed, or cancelled.
`exportId`	No	Export id when autoExport succeeded (vg_expo_...).
`projectId`	Yes	Project created for this exact workflow attempt (vg_proj_...). A retry creates a different project.
`projectUrl`	Yes	Deep link to the project created for this exact workflow attempt. Keep it paired with workflowRunId; a retry returns a new URL.
`downloadUrl`	No	Signed MP4 download URL when autoExport succeeded. Give this to the user.
`attemptIndex`	No	Current or latest attempt index.
`exportFileId`	No	File id of the rendered MP4 when autoExport succeeded.
`workflowType`	No	Workflow type (present after polling).
`workflowRunId`	Yes	Workflow run id (vg_work_...). Keep it paired with this response's projectId and projectUrl; a retry returns a new tuple.
`remixActionIds`	No	Remix action ids from the start response (empty when none requested).
`progressPercentage`	No	Completion progress 0-100 (present after polling).
`downloadUrlExpiresAt`	No	Unix expiry for downloadUrl.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.2.1Oct 2, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is already covered. The description adds that exactly one clip is produced and that it lands in an editable project, but says nothing about generation latency, cost, or the fact that the run can block until an MP4 is ready (a behavior that only appears in the autoExport parameter's schema text).

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is efficient, though its brevity is partly the source of the definition's gaps rather than a virtue of tight writing.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover the mutation profile. But for a six-parameter, nested-object generation tool with an ambiguous sibling, the description omits the usage routing and the long-running/autoExport behavior that an agent needs before invoking it.

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 83%, so most parameters are already documented in the schema and the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds nothing about duration, quality tiers, aspect ratio units, or the autoExport workflow, and does not compensate for the one undocumented parameter (durationSeconds).

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Generate one short AI video clip from a prompt') and adds a scope qualifier ('inside an editable project'), which is more than a restatement of the name. However, it does not distinguish itself from the near-identical sibling 'generate_video_clip', nor from the other prompt-to-video routes (script_to_video, storyboard_to_video), leaving an agent unable to tell them apart from the description alone.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternative is named despite several siblings that also produce video from input. The agent is left to infer that this is the one-shot, prompt-driven path versus the storyboard/script paths.

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

Deploy Server