Sends After Effects Render Queue items to Adobe Media Encoder, optionally adds a composition, and can start the AME queue immediately.
After Effects: send queued Render Queue items to Adobe Media Encoder (preferred render path), optionally adding a comp first and starting the AME queue immediately.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| addComp | No | ||
| outputPath | No | ||
| startRender | 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?
Annotations already declare non-readOnly, non-destructive, closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value by disclosing the optional comp-add step and that the AME queue can be started immediately, but omits whether the call blocks, what happens if AME is absent or the queue is empty, and what the return looks like for a long-running render handoff.
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?
A single well-built sentence with the verb and target front-loaded, then optional behaviors appended in a compact parenthetical. No filler and nothing restated from the title or schema.
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?
For a cross-application handoff tool with no output schema, the definition should state prerequisites and failure modes (AME not installed, empty queue) and clarify outputPath. It covers the happy path and the optional switches but leaves an agent unable to predict environment-dependent failure.
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 25% schema description coverage, the description partially compensates: "optionally adding a comp first" maps to addComp and "starting the AME queue immediately" maps to startRender, while compositionName is already documented in the schema. outputPath, arguably the most consequential parameter, gets no explanation at all in either place.
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?
Names a specific verb and resource ("send queued Render Queue items to Adobe Media Encoder") and the parenthetical "preferred render path" implicitly separates it from the in-AE render siblings such as ae_renderQueue and ae_addToRenderQueue. It stops short of naming those siblings outright, so an agent must infer which tool to skip.
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?
"(preferred render path)" gives a strong hint about when to choose this over AE-native rendering, but there is no explicit when-not, no statement of prerequisites (AME must be installed/running, the Render Queue must be non-empty), and no named alternative. Usage is implied rather than stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.