Deletes After Effects comp or layer markers all at once, by index list, or within a time range; omit compositionName to use the active comp.
After Effects: delete comp/layer markers — all, by index list, or within a time range.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| to | No | ||
| from | No | ||
| layer | No | Layer name or 1-based index. | |
| indexes | No | ||
| compositionName | No | Comp name; omit to use the active comp. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the agent knows this is a destructive mutation. The description adds useful context by specifying that markers are being deleted and whether scope is comp-wide or layer-specific. It does not disclose irreversibility, default behavior with no parameters, or permission requirements.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The single sentence is front-loaded with the action and resource, then lists the three supported modes. Every clause adds useful scope information with no wasted wording.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
This is a destructive tool with zero required parameters and only 40% schema coverage, so the description should make the default behavior unambiguous. It lists the available modes but does not explicitly say whether omitting all parameters deletes every marker, which is a meaningful safety gap. Annotations cover the destructive nature, so the description is adequate but incomplete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
With only 40% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for gaps. It clarifies that indexes select markers by list and from/to select a time range, and that the operation can target comp or layer markers. It does not explain time units, inclusivity, layer/compositionName interaction, or the zero-parameter default.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description gives a specific verb and resource: delete comp/layer markers in After Effects. It also names the three deletion modes, so the agent can distinguish this from ae_addMarkers and ae_getMarkers. It does not explicitly contrast with those siblings, which keeps it from a 5.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies when to use each deletion mode: all markers, a list of indexes, or a time range. However, it does not state when to prefer this tool over ae_addMarkers, ae_getMarkers, or pr_deleteMarkers, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.