Skip to main content
Glama
IBM
by IBM

remotion_get_composition_info

Retrieve current video composition details including components, timeline, duration, and configuration for video editing and management.

Instructions

Get information about the current composition.

Returns details about the current composition including all components,
timeline, duration, and configuration.

Returns:
    JSON with composition information

Example:
    info = await remotion_get_composition_info()
    # Returns composition details, components, timeline, etc.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function for the 'remotion_get_composition_info' tool. Decorated with @mcp.tool for registration. Returns JSON info about the current project composition using project_manager.get_project_info().
    @mcp.tool  # type: ignore[arg-type]
    async def remotion_get_composition_info() -> str:
        """
        Get information about the current composition.
    
        Returns details about the current composition including all components,
        timeline, duration, and configuration.
    
        Returns:
            JSON with composition information
    
        Example:
            info = await remotion_get_composition_info()
            # Returns composition details, components, timeline, etc.
        """
    
        def _get():
            if not project_manager.current_composition:
                return json.dumps({"error": "No active composition"})
    
            return json.dumps(project_manager.get_project_info(), indent=2)
    
        return await asyncio.get_event_loop().run_in_executor(None, _get)
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that the tool returns details like components, timeline, duration, and configuration, which adds some context about what information is retrieved. However, it doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits such as whether it's read-only, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what happens if no composition is current. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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?

The description is appropriately sized and front-loaded, starting with the core purpose. However, the 'Example' section is somewhat redundant, as it restates the return without adding new usage insights. Overall, it's efficient but could be slightly more streamlined by removing the example or integrating it better.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (simple info retrieval with 0 parameters) and no output schema, the description is moderately complete. It explains what information is returned (components, timeline, etc.), but lacks details on the return format beyond 'JSON with composition information' and doesn't cover error cases or prerequisites. With no annotations, it should do more to compensate, making it adequate but with clear gaps.

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?

The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so the schema fully documents the lack of parameters. The description doesn't add parameter-specific information, which is appropriate since there are no parameters. According to the rules, 0 parameters results in a baseline score of 4, as no additional semantic detail is needed beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get information about the current composition.' It specifies the verb ('Get') and resource ('current composition'), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'remotion_get_info' or 'remotion_get_theme_info', which might also retrieve information about different aspects. This makes it clear but not fully sibling-distinctive.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when it's appropriate (e.g., for composition-specific details) or when not to use it (e.g., for general info or theme info), nor does it reference sibling tools like 'remotion_get_info' or 'remotion_get_theme_info' as alternatives. This lack of context leaves usage unclear.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/IBM/chuk-motion'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server