script_run or Agent Completion: which for a GPT-6.1 Sol agent?
A GPT-6.1 Sol coding agent can call Sume via MCP script_run or Agent Completions. Which fits fan-out of known calls, and which fits open-ended tasks.

Use script_run when your coding agent already knows the calls: three or more independent tool calls of the same shape, such as one image per scene. Use an Agent Completion when the task itself is open-ended and Sume's own agent should decide the steps. script_run runs in a bounded 5 to 55 second window on the MCP session; a completion is an asynchronous run with its own sandbox, started over the API with a required spend cap.
What each one is
MCP tools and gates describes script_run as a short JavaScript program run on the Sume side that calls listed tools in a loop, in parallel or conditionally, and returns one value. It is bounded by timeout_seconds (5 to 55), max_calls and max_paid_calls, and paid creates inside it still need their own idempotency_key. The Agent Completions page describes an unattended run of the Sume Agent with a sandbox, tools, an MCP bridge and media generation, answering 202 with a receipt you poll.
Side by side
| Question | `script_run` | Agent Completion |
|---|---|---|
| Who plans the steps? | Your agent writes the script | Sume's agent decides |
| Entry point | Hosted MCP tool | POST /v1/agent/completions |
| Time model | Up to 55 seconds, then jobs to wait on | Asynchronous run, poll or webhook |
| Spend control | max_paid_calls, max_spend_usd per call | Required generation_spend_cap_usd |
| Credential | OAuth with write, or an API key | API key with agent_completions:write (service-account keys are refused) |
| Result | Returned value, call journal, child jobs | output, artifacts, usage |
Rules of thumb
- Fan-out of identical, well-specified calls:
script_run. Six scene stills, ten caption passes. - Read-heavy discovery that needs judgment: let the coding agent call read tools directly.
- A brief like "make a teaser from this URL" where the steps are unknown: Agent Completion.
- Anything that must survive the coding session ending: Agent Completion, or save job ids from
script_runand wait later.
Limits to remember
Discovery tools and script_run itself cannot be called from a script. script_run returns child jobs[] you still jobs_wait on, one call holding up to 55 seconds. A completion has no streaming and no thread continuation yet, and assistant turns in messages[] are rejected. If you need a saved, repeatable workflow with changing inputs, a Format is a third option, and Scheduled runs saved instructions on a clock.
Whichever route you use, the model on your side does not have to be GPT-6.1 Sol. The same split applies to any coding agent that can speak MCP or HTTP.
Sources
Related posts
More in Agents
- TikTok trend search then import over Sume MCP: $0.10 + $0.15
Searching TikTok trend metadata costs about $0.10 and importing one video about $0.15 over Sume MCP, so a find-and-mirror step is about $0.25 before generation.
- What did my seller agent spend? Read Sume usage by thread
Amazon's Seller Assistant plugin logs its actions with audit trails. For the media your agent made through Sume, read the cost by thread_id and run_id.
- Who authorizes agent spend on Sume: mcp:write, key and balance
On Sume, spend is authorized by the token: mcp:read hides paid tools, mcp:write allows them, and an API key sees all. There is no mcp:paid scope.
- x402 upto vs exact: how each maps to a Sume spend cap
Apify's x402 upto charges actual usage up to an allowance; exact takes a fixed $1.00 deposit and refunds the rest. Sume's analogue is a per-call spend cap.
Written by Sume