Morpha

set_matte_source

Set (or clear) a track matte — the host shows only where the matte source is opaque. The HOST can be a leaf (image., video., shapes., text.) OR a group. (a group is a layer of sorts): a group host clips ALL its composited children to the source shape's path — e.g. a marching chevron strip + black backing shown only inside an arrow / band shape. For a leaf host the source can be any leaf (use a text. source for video-/image-filled letterforms); for a group host the source must be a shape (shapes.). Make the source layer hidden so it acts purely as the stencil. Pass null to clear.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`elementId`	Yes	Host being masked: image/video/shapes/text.<id>, or group.<id>.
`projectId`	Yes	Opaque project id (a v4 UUID, from list_projects/create_project). Selects which existing project this call mutates.
`matte_inverted`	No	Optional. Invert the mask (knock-out): the host shows everywhere EXCEPT where the source is opaque — a punch-through / spotlight. Honored on leaf hosts; ignored on group hosts. Omitted = preserve current; clearing the mask resets it.
`matte_source_id`	Yes	Element id of the layer whose alpha drives the mask, or null to clear.

Schema Changelog

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

First observedSep 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description discloses key behavioral details: how the matte affects visibility, inversion behavior, handling of omitted parameters, and the effect of passing null to clear. However, it does not mention persistence, reversibility, or any side effects beyond the matte settings, which slightly reduces transparency.

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?

The description is informative but somewhat wordy, repeating examples and rephrasing the same idea across multiple sentences. It is well-structured and does not contain irrelevant details, but it could be tightened without losing clarity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers all necessary context for using the tool: parameter behaviors, host type constraints, handling of omitted values, and the clearing mechanism. Even without an output schema, the description provides sufficient guidance for an agent to call the tool correctly in various scenarios.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Each parameter is clearly described in the schema and enriched by the tool description. The description adds context about host types (leaf vs group) and source constraints (e.g., group hosts require shapes). The 'matte_inverted' parameter is well explained with its optional behavior, and 'matte_source_id' clarifies null semantics. Full schema coverage is achieved.

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 states the tool's primary function: setting or clearing a track matte, where the host shows only where the matte source is opaque. It also provides concrete examples (e.g., a marching chevron strip) and differentiates between host types, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explains when to use the tool (to apply a matte to a leaf or group host) and mentions the behavior for group vs leaf hosts, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use it. The examples help, but explicit guidance on tool selection is absent.

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?