Add an After Effects composition to the render queue using its name and an absolute output path to start rendering.
Add a composition to the After Effects render queue
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| comp_name | Yes | Composition name to render | |
| output_path | Yes | Absolute output file path |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It states only the literal action and leaves unstated whether rendering starts automatically, whether existing queue items are preserved, and how output_path is applied (e.g. creates an output module).
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?
Single sentence, no filler, front-loaded with action. It is compact, though it sacrifices informational richness; conciseness itself is strong.
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 two-parameter append action, schema plus description is nearly sufficient, but missing context about queue workflow (e.g., use ae_start_render separately) and duplicate behavior. Given no annotations, there is a notable gap but not a fatal one.
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?
Schema already documents both comp_name and output_path at 100% coverage. Description adds no param-specific semantics, so baseline 3 applies.
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?
Description uses a specific verb ('Add') and resource ('composition ... render queue'), clearly indicating this queues a comp for later rendering. It is distinguishable from siblings like ae_start_render and ae_get_render_queue, though it doesn't explicitly disambiguate them.
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?
No guidance on when to use this vs alternatives such as ae_start_render, ae_render_headless, or ae_clear_render_queue. Agent must infer that adding to the queue is a separate step from starting the render.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.