Absorbing energy in any wavelength induces a temperature change in the material doing the absorbing. A given material can possibly absorb energy in visible, UV, radio, X-ray, whatever. The incident photons induce temporary energy-level changes that affect the equilibrium or balance of bonding forces between atoms and molecules. Then further, this increased energy activity is traded around within the material causing higher randomized vibration of the atoms - essentially the definition of increased temperature. This increased energy will eventually dissipate through the classic mechanisms of heat loss: radiation (typically IR, ie invisible to us unless the heating state is very extreme red-hot blue-hot white-hot etc), convection and conduction. Unusual materials can also have mechanisms of phosphorescence and fluorescence that give up energy in the visible spectrum, but not presently available window tint that I know of
.
However, having made that point regarding energy absorption in the visible and UV followed by dissipation heat loss, I do think that the "UV blocking" of typical window films is more a function of them reflecting almost all of the incident UV, rather than energy absorption->heating within the film material. But next, and this is pretty interesting to me, think about what happens if you start with a sheet of glass that is somewhat UV reflective ie "UV blocking", but not perfectly so, in other words a significant amount of UV comes through.
Let's say the roof glass reflects or absorbs 75% of the UV energy being considered. Then let's say you're not satisfied with this performance, so you put an even better UV reflector on the inside surface of said glass, perhaps a 99% UV reflector. This means that the unblocked (transmitted) 25% portion of external UV radiation gets through the glass layer, but is reflected back by the highly UV-reflective tint film, and then 75% of
that back-reflected UV is absorbed or reflected ed inwards again... As this light energy bounces back and forth within the sandwich*, and meanwhile the strong supply of fresh solar UV is still pouring in, there is an equilibrium rate of energy absorption and dissipation that leads to a temperature rise of the glass itself - higher than it would have been without the interior film.
While I don't think it's very common, it's not impossible that this extra delta-T could be the straw that broke the camel's back, causing expansion stress failure or locally stressing a flaw or scratch in the glass that would otherwise have held up. As discussed many times, the convex-shaped and specially-formulated roof glass is remarkably strong against compressive stress and impact from the outside, but relatively weak against disturbances from the inside. This could translate to a failure if the interior applied film decides to shrink strongly against the interior roof surface, creating exactly the kind of stress that the roof is weakest against.
My glass roof has been okay after being 3M tinted and sitting outside through the Tucson summer, and I certainly think I would do it again. But if it cracks at some point, I won't storm Into the tint shop to demand compensation.
Bottom line is that I'm somewhere between the camps of "it's dangerous to tint the roof" and "it's a BS excuse by Tlthe tint shop". Just find a place that has done it, hasn't had customer problems and is willing to do it for you.
* it's actually even more complicated than this, because the amount of reflection vs transmission at an optical interface can be very different in the Inside-out vs outside-in direction, and also depends on the angle of incidence and the wavelength. But it's safe to say that the application of the UV/IR tint film changes the equilibrium conditions regarding heating of the glass roof.