Morpha

add_audio_overlay

Add an audio overlay (mp3/m4a/wav/ogg) scheduled at a frame-aligned start. The asset must already exist at users//assets//. 30 fps; convert seconds with frames = round(s * 30). Plays in the editor preview and is mixed into the MP4 export.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`gain`	No	Linear gain 0..2. Default 1.
`endFrame`	No	Optional end frame; omit to play the asset's full natural length from startFrame.
`filename`	Yes	Audio asset filename in the project's assets bucket.
`projectId`	Yes	Opaque project id (a v4 UUID, from list_projects/create_project). Selects which existing project this call mutates.
`startFrame`	Yes	Frame at which the overlay starts (0-indexed, 30 fps).
`fadeInFrames`	No	Linear fade-in length in frames. Default 0.
`fadeOutFrames`	No	Linear fade-out length in frames. Default 0.
`sourceLayerId`	No	Optional video layer element id ("video.<id>") to weld this overlay to. When set, the editor renders the overlay as a waveform footer on that clip and drags it with the clip instead of showing a standalone bottom row.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

First observedSep 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of explaining side effects and constraints. It discloses that the asset must already exist, that the overlay is frame-aligned at 30 fps, and that it plays in the preview and is mixed into the MP4 export. It does not mention failure behavior if the asset is missing, but the key behavioral traits are covered.

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?

The description is concise and well-structured: a single statement of purpose followed by essential prerequisite and behavior details. Every sentence contributes useful information without redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given the schema covers all parameters and there is no output schema, the description provides sufficient context for an agent to decide when to use the tool, what inputs are needed, and what the observable outcome will be. It could mention return values or error handling, but the core context is present.

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?

The schema already provides 100% coverage of parameters with detailed descriptions, so the added semantic value from the tool description is limited. The description reinforces the overall frame-rate context but does not add meaning beyond the existing parameter 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?

The description clearly identifies the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Add') and object ('audio overlay'), and the name aligns perfectly. It also distinguishes this tool from siblings like update_audio_overlay and remove_audio_overlay by describing the creation action.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides concrete usage guidance: supported audio formats, the required asset path, and the frame-to-seconds conversion rule. It does not explicitly compare with update_audio_overlay or upload_audio, but the naming and action imply when this should be used for new overlays.

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

All Morpha tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

The tool set has several clusters that overlap conceptually: add_keyframe/add_keyframes/set_keyframes_batch, move_band/move_layer/shift_group/set_group_window, and fade_layer/set_layer_transition/set_layer_visible all target similar actions. However, each tool's description is distinct and detailed enough for an agent to disambiguate after careful reading. The sheer volume of 95 tools still creates meaningful selection risk.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names overwhelmingly follow a verb_noun snake_case pattern (add_, remove_, set_, list_, rename_, create_, delete_), which is predictable and readable. Minor inconsistencies exist: plural variants like add_keyframes vs add_keyframe, mixed specificity like remove_keyframe vs remove_color_keyframe, and a few oddballs like reid_project and clip_processing_status. Overall the pattern is strong and helps navigation.

Tool Count2/5

95 tools is far beyond the well-scoped range and will overwhelm agents; even a comprehensive video editor could consolidate keyframe batch operations, overlay/track manipulations, and page/group window controls. Many tools are highly specific (reid_project, safe_zones, move_band) and place burden on the agent to pick among near-synonym verbs. While the broad domain justifies many operations, this count is excessive for a coherent tool surface.

Completeness3/5

The surface covers a broad editing lifecycle: layers, keyframes, text, captions, audio, pages, groups, versions, projects, workspaces, and collections, including batch operations. However, there is no MCP tool to render/export the final MP4 (explicitly delegated to an SDK) and no upload_video tool for bringing in a clip file, leaving major end-to-end gaps. For the stated purpose of building and editing videos, these are significant omissions that force agents to stop short of delivery.

Resources

Need Help?