Skip to main content
Glama

Morpha

by ai.morphareels
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Set video layer trim

set_video_layer_trim
Destructive

Patch a video layer's trim window: source_in_frame (frame in source to start), source_out_frame (frame in source to stop, or null for natural end), timeline_start_frame (where on the project timeline the slice begins). Only the fields you pass are changed. Use this to clip out a segment of a source mp4: duplicate the layer first (in the editor) so you have two pointing at the same clip, then set disjoint source windows.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
elementIdYesvideo.<id> of the layer to trim.
projectIdYesOpaque project id (a v4 UUID, from list_projects/create_project). Selects which existing project this call mutates.
source_in_frameNoFrame in the source mp4 where playback begins (0-indexed, 30 fps).
source_out_frameNoFrame in the source mp4 where playback stops, or null to clear and play to the source's natural end.
timeline_start_frameNoProject-timeline frame where this slice begins playing.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYesWhether the call succeeded.
dataNoThe payload, shaped by the tool.
noteNoWhat to do next when not ready.
errorNoWhy it failed.
statusNoFor cache-backed readers: whether the answer was ready.
editorUrlNoOpens this project in the editor.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • 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",
-  "projectId",
-  "anonymousToken"
-]New value: +[
+  "elementId",
+  "projectId"
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • 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"
+}
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • 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",
-  "projectId"
-]New value: +[
+  "elementId",
+  "projectId",
+  "anonymousToken"
+]
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the agent knows this is a mutation. The description adds valuable transparency by stating 'Only the fields you pass are changed,' which clarifies the partial-update behavior. It also explains that source_out_frame can be null to play to natural end. However, it doesn't discuss reversibility or permission requirements, but these are not essential given the annotation coverage. The partial-update disclosure is a meaningful addition beyond the schema.

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 compact—two sentences that front-load the core action and then provide the workflow. Every sentence earns its place: the first defines the operation and parameters, the second gives the use case and a concrete recipe. There is no fluff or repetition.

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 that the schema covers all parameters and an output schema exists, the description need not explain return values. The workflow hint (duplicate the layer) is a useful completeness addition that covers a common edge case. It doesn't address potential errors (e.g., invalid frame ranges), but for a patch operation with clear field semantics, this is adequately complete. A perfect 5 might include a note about validation, but the description already stands above typical tools.

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 100%, so all parameters are already documented in the schema. The description re-states each parameter with slight elaboration (e.g., 'frame in source to start' vs. schema's 'Frame in the source mp4 where playback begins'), but the added value is minimal. It doesn't introduce any semantic that isn't already in the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3 but doesn't exceed it.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Patch a video layer's trim window,' and then enumerates the three fields that make up the trim. It also states the intended use case ('clip out a segment of a source mp4'), which clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like set_video_clip or set_duration. The purpose is unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool ('Use this to clip out a segment of a source mp4') and even provides a step-by-step recipe: 'duplicate the layer first... then set disjoint source windows.' This goes beyond mere context and offers actionable guidance for correct invocation, making it superior to simply saying 'use for trimming.'

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

All Morpha toolsInspect
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