Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ASCII Motion MCP

ASCII Motion MCP

by CameronFoxly
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

add_keyframe

Add a keyframe to a layer property track, creating the track if it doesn't exist. Specify layer, property, frame, value, and easing.

Instructions

Add a keyframe to a layer property track. Creates the property track if it doesn't exist.

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": {
      "layerId": "<layerId>",
      "propertyPath": "<propertyPath>",
      "frame": "<frame>",
      "value": "<value>"
    },
    "name": "add_keyframe"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
layerIdYesLayer ID
propertyPathYesProperty to keyframe (e.g., transform.position.x)
frameYesFrame number
valueYesKeyframe value
easingNoEasing curve (defaults to linear)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.1.4

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Discloses that it creates the property track if it doesn't exist, but does not explain overwrite behavior, error conditions, or default easing (linear). With no annotations, more detail would be beneficial.

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 short sentences, entirely front-loaded with core purpose. No wasted words.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Missing return value description, error handling, and deeper behavioral details for a tool with 5 parameters and a nested object. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides for parameters.

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 adds a keyframe to a layer property track and creates the track if needed. It distinguishes from siblings like add_effect_keyframe (for effects) and add_frame (for frames).

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings (e.g., add_effect_keyframe, remove_keyframe). The description does not mention prerequisites or scenarios where it should not be used.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools