Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

osc-bridge

by io.github.roomi-fields
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

comment_preset

Comment on a shared preset — how it sounds, how you used it, what you changed — optionally attaching your remix (a preset you shared with derived_from). Comments are public at once. Also: remove one of this account's comments (remove), or flag someone else's as abusive or off-topic (flag); comments several accounts flag are hidden until reviewed.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "comment_preset"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoThe preset to comment on.
flagNoId of someone else's comment to flag (instead of commenting).
textNoThe comment (2000 characters at most).
remixNoId of your remix, to attach.
removeNoId of this account's comment to remove (instead of commenting).
user_idNoYour anonymous SynthHub id, if you kept it from an earlier session (see the server instructions). Optional.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

It usefully discloses that 'Comments are public at once' and that flagged comments 'are hidden until reviewed', which is real behavior beyond the annotations. But annotations declare destructiveHint=false while the description offers a 'remove one of this account's comments' mode and a flag mode that hides someone else's content; those are state-destroying/altering effects, so the description conflicts with the annotation's safety profile.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The primary action is front-loaded in the first clause and every clause carries information — visibility, moderation, mode names. The em-dash and parenthetical stacking of three operations makes it dense, but there is no filler.

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?

With no output schema and a six-parameter, zero-required-parameter surface, the description covers the main behaviors an agent needs: publicity, moderation outcome, remix provenance, and mode selection. It leaves open the success/failure response and the all-optional-parameters ambiguity, which is a modest gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, and the description adds genuine meaning: remix must be 'a preset you shared with derived_from', and remove/flag are framed as alternatives to commenting rather than additions. It does not explain the 2000-char limit or user_id, but those are fully covered in the schema.

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?

Concrete verb plus resource ('Comment on a shared preset') with the payload described ('how it sounds, how you used it, what you changed'), plus two secondary modes named. It is clear what the tool does, but bundling commenting, removing, and flagging into one tool muddies the single-purpose signal a caller would like.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives the triggers for the secondary modes — 'remove one of this account's comments' vs 'flag someone else's as abusive or off-topic' — which implies the ownership rules for choosing between them. However, it never distinguishes this from siblings like report_preset, and it does not state what happens if no mode parameter is supplied.

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

All osc-bridge toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources