Simpler.Asia

studio.remove_track

Remove one track by track_id. A track that still holds clips is refused unless delete_clips is true, which removes its clips with it. Refuses, naming the fix: an unknown track_id, a locked track, a track with clips and no delete_clips, or the last track of its role (every project keeps one of each).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>",
      "track_id": "<track_id>"
    },
    "name": "studio.remove_track"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`track_id`	Yes	The track (vtr_) from get_composition's tracks.
`project_id`	Yes	The studio project (vp_…) this tool acts on.
`delete_clips`	No	true removes the track's clips with it; left out, a track with clips is refused.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only tell us readOnlyHint=false. The description goes much further: it discloses the cascade (clips are destroyed with the track), the four refusal conditions, and the invariant that every project keeps one track of each role. That's exactly the destructive-behavior context an agent needs before calling.

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?

Three tight sentences with the core action front-loaded, then the destructive caveat, then the refusal list. Every clause carries information; no filler.

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?

For a destructive tool with no output schema, it covers the risks and error paths thoroughly. Minor gap: it doesn't say what a successful call returns or whether the removal is undoable via snapshots/versions, which matters for a mutation.

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% and the schema already explains track_id's vtr_ prefix and delete_clips' effect. The description restates delete_clips' semantics rather than adding new format or sourcing detail, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource+scope: 'Remove one track by track_id.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling mutation tools like studio.delete_element, studio.remove_snapshot and studio.add_track, which operate on other objects.

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?

It states precisely when the tool refuses and what the fix is (set delete_clips, unlock, don't remove the last of a role), which effectively tells the agent the correct calling conditions. It stops short of naming a preferred alternative tool for those cases, so 4 rather than 5.

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

All Simpler.Asia 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?