Final Cut Pro MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains what adjustment layers do (apply effects to clips beneath them), but lacks details on prerequisites (e.g., requires a timeline with clips), side effects (e.g., may affect rendering performance), or error conditions (e.g., what happens if no clip is selected).

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 description is two sentences with zero waste: the first states the action and placement, the second explains the functional impact. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and efficiently structured.

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?

Given 0 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and effect of adjustment layers. However, as a mutation tool with no annotations, it lacks details on behavioral aspects like permissions, reversibility, or error handling, leaving gaps for an AI agent to use it correctly in complex scenarios.

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?

The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately adds no parameter details, maintaining focus on the tool's purpose and usage. A baseline of 4 is applied since no parameters exist.

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 clearly states the specific action ('Add an adjustment layer') and resource ('above the current clip'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'add_effect' or 'add_color_correction' by specifying that adjustment layers apply effects to all clips beneath them in the timeline.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool ('apply effects to all clips beneath them in the timeline'), which implicitly differentiates it from tools that apply effects to individual clips. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name specific alternatives among siblings.

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