Creator MCP

Open the document in LottieFiles Creator

creator_open_in_creator

Save the focused composition to the caller's LottieFiles workspace and give the user the returned creatorUrl, which opens it in LottieFiles Creator. The first call on a document creates the file; every later call writes a new version of that same file, so creatorUrl and fileId stay the same (rebound: true when the file was gone and a new one was made). Errors: empty_document, no_focused_composition (creator.focusOn first), payload_too_large.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "creator_open_in_creator"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	No	Title of a file this call creates, 1 to 100 characters (default: the composition's name); a new version keeps the file's title unless given.
`documentId`	No	Document to open (default "default").

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses the write lifecycle (first call creates a file, later calls write new versions while creatorUrl and fileId stay stable) and explains the rebound flag when a file had to be recreated. It also enumerates concrete failure modes (empty_document, no_focused_composition, payload_too_large), which an agent cannot get from the structured fields alone.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the action and the returned creatorUrl, then lifecycle, then error codes. The parentheticals are dense but each carries real information; only the nested error parenthetical slightly hurts scanability.

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 an existing output schema (creatorUrl, fileId, rebound), the description covers the mutation semantics, stability of returned identifiers, prerequisites, and error cases well. The remaining gap is the unresolved overlap with the save-to-workspace sibling, which leaves selection ambiguity for a tool with real write side effects.

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 both parameters are already documented in the schema, including the name defaulting to the composition name and the version behavior. The description adds little parameter-level detail beyond the framing of documentId as the document being opened, so baseline 3 applies.

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 verb and resource: save the focused composition to the workspace and hand back a creatorUrl that opens it in LottieFiles Creator. It is far clearer than the title alone, but it never distinguishes this tool from the sibling creator_save_to_workspace, which reads as an overlapping capability.

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?

Usage is implied through the create-vs-new-version lifecycle and the note that no_focused_composition means you must call creator.focusOn first, which is useful prerequisite guidance. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not or routing against creator_save_to_workspace or creator_open_in_creator-style alternatives, so the agent must infer the choice.

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

All Creator MCP 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.