Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
After Effects MCP Server

After Effects MCP Server

by SUBSAHARXN
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

list-available-effects

Retrieve all effects installed in After Effects, filtered by name, matchName, or category. Specify includeObsolete to show deprecated effects and maxResults to cap output.

Instructions

List all effects available in this After Effects installation, with optional text filter.

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": "list-available-effects"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryNoOptional text filter. Matches effect name, matchName, and category.
maxResultsNoMaximum results to return (default: 5000).
includeObsoleteNoInclude obsolete effects (default: false).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the optional text filter but does not disclose default behavior like exclusion of obsolete effects or result limits, which are only in the schema. For a read-only listing, this is minimal but not misleading.

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?

A single sentence of 13 words that is front-loaded with the action and scope. No unnecessary words or repetition, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

The tool is low-complexity, but with no output schema or annotations, the description needs to carry more context. It omits details about the return format and default filtering behavior, though the schema covers parameter specifics. Adequate but not complete.

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 the baseline is 3. The description only mentions the optional filter, which maps to the query parameter, but adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's own parameter descriptions.

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 action (List) and the resource (effects available in this After Effects installation). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list-layer-effects by specifying installation-level scope, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list-layer-effects or search-presets. The description does not mention any exclusions or trade-offs, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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