Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kdenlive MCP Server

Kdenlive MCP Server

by Va1bhav512
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

guide_remove

Delete a guide marker from a Kdenlive project by its numeric ID. Removes unwanted timeline markers to keep project navigation clear.

Instructions

Delete a guide marker by its ID.

Args: guide_id: Numeric guide identifier.

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": {
      "guide_id": "<guide_id>"
    },
    "name": "guide_remove"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
guide_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.2

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the basic delete action but does not mention whether deletion is permanent, what happens if the guide_id does not exist, or any side effects.

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?

The description is extremely concise and front-loaded, with a clear action sentence followed by a single parameter explanation. No unnecessary information is included.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple single-parameter delete tool with an output schema, the description is largely complete for invocation. It is missing minor behavioral context such as idempotency and error handling, but those are not critical for basic use.

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?

The schema has no property descriptions, so the description's 'Numeric guide identifier' provides the semantic role for guide_id. It is helpful but largely restates the schema type and title, adding little beyond identifying the parameter as the guide's ID.

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 verb 'Delete' and the resource 'guide marker', making the tool's purpose immediately understandable. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling remove tools such as marker_remove or filter_remove, aside from the resource name.

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 about when to use this tool versus related alternatives like guide_update, guide_list, or marker_remove. It only states the action, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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