Skip to main content
Glama

Comp info

ae_comp_info
Read-only

Fetch composition details — size, fps, duration, work area, motion blur, and layer summaries — for one or more After Effects comps by name or item id in a single call.

Instructions

Detailed comp info: size, fps, duration, work area, motion blur, layer summaries. Pass a comp name or item id — or an ARRAY of them to fetch several comps in one call.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
instanceNoAfter Effects instance to address for this call, when several are running (AfterFX.exe -m): an instance id (its AE_MCP_INSTANCE at launch, or the `name` given to instance.start) or the name of the project file it has open. Omit to use this server's default (AE_MCP_INSTANCE, else the single live instance). ae_context and ae_do instance.list show what is live.
nameOrIdYesComposition name (exact match) or numeric item id — or an array of either to batch several comps into one round trip. If you don't know any, call ae_project_info first.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0-alpha.3-studio.3

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint, so safety is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by listing the exact comp properties returned and noting that an array fetches several comps in one call, which tells the agent what to expect beyond 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 tightly packed sentences with zero filler. The key capabilities (returned fields, batching) are front-loaded and easy to scan.

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 read-only info tool with no output schema, the description adequately enumerates the returned data and batching behavior. It could mention error cases or use of the instance parameter, but the schema already covers instance details.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds a semantic nuance: passing an array fetches several comps in one call, clarifying batching behavior beyond the schema's type definition.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Detailed comp info' and enumerates the returned properties (size, fps, duration, work area, motion blur, layer summaries). It does not explicitly name sibling tools to differentiate, so not a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-tool guidance. The description only covers parameter input (name/ID or array). The schema mentions calling ae_project_info first, but that context is absent from the description itself.

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