Morpha

Remove keyframe

remove_keyframe

Destructive

Remove the keyframe at frame N on a layer's track. Removing the last keyframe from a track restores the layer's static base value across the timeline.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`frame`	Yes
`property`	Yes
`elementId`	Yes
`projectId`	Yes	Opaque project id (a v4 UUID, from list_projects/create_project). Selects which existing project this call mutates.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	Yes	Whether the call succeeded.
`data`	No	The payload, shaped by the tool.
`note`	No	What to do next when not ready.
`error`	No	Why it failed.
`status`	No	For cache-backed readers: whether the answer was ready.
`editorUrl`	No	Opens this project in the editor.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 17, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / anonymousToken

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "The token create_anonymous_account returned. This connection has no Morpha key, so every call carries it.",
-  "type": "string"
-}

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "elementId",
-  "property",
-  "frame",
-  "projectId",
-  "anonymousToken"
-]New value: +[
+  "elementId",
+  "property",
+  "frame",
+  "projectId"
+]

Changed1 schema field changedSep 15, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "description": "The result envelope every Morpha tool returns.",
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "description": "The payload, shaped by the tool.",
+      "type": [
+        "object",
+        "array",
+        "string",
+        "number",
+        "boolean",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "editorUrl": {
+      "description": "Opens this project in the editor.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "error": {
+      "description": "Why it failed.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "note": {
+      "description": "What to do next when not ready.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "description": "Whether the call succeeded.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "description": "For cache-backed readers: whether the answer was ready.",
+      "enum": [
+        "ready",
+        "not-ready"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "ok"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 11, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / anonymousToken

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The token create_anonymous_account returned. This connection has no Morpha key, so every call carries it.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "elementId",
-  "property",
-  "frame",
-  "projectId"
-]New value: +[
+  "elementId",
+  "property",
+  "frame",
+  "projectId",
+  "anonymousToken"
+]

First observedSep 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark the operation as destructive, and the description consistently describes removal. It adds valuable extra context by disclosing that removing the last keyframe restores the layer's static base value, which is not derivable from the annotations. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and every sentence earns its place by either defining the operation or explaining an important edge behavior. No filler.

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?

For a destructive 4-parameter tool, the core action and one edge case are covered, and an output schema is present so return values need no explanation. However, the description does not specify what happens when no keyframe exists at frame N, how the property parameter maps to a track, or any prerequisites, leaving some ambiguity for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 25% (only projectId is documented), and the description does not compensate. It references 'frame N' but never explains elementId, property, or how the property selects the track; the enum values carry what meaning they can, but the description adds little beyond the schema.

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 states a specific action (remove) and resource (keyframe at frame N on a layer's track), so an agent can tell it is a keyframe-removal tool. It does not explicitly contrast with the sibling remove_color_keyframe or remove_speed_keyframe tools, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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?

The behavior note about removing the last keyframe implies when the tool matters and hints at the effect, but no alternative tools are mentioned and no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. This is adequate but leaves the choice between this and sibling keyframe-removal tools to inference.

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

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?