norns-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

norns_set_param

Sets a norns parameter by ID and reads it back, using REPL by default or OSC; runs dry unless live and confirm are enabled.

Instructions

WRITE. Set a param (option params take the 1-based index) and read it back. via='repl' (default, verified path) or 'osc' (/param/, unverified). Dry run unless --live; live needs confirm=true.

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": {
      "param_id": "<param_id>",
      "value": "<value>"
    },
    "name": "norns_set_param"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`via`	No	repl
`value`	Yes
`confirm`	No
`param_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description must carry the full weight of behavioral disclosure. It successfully communicates complex behavioral traits, including the two distinct paths for execution (`via`), the read-back function, and safety guards like dry runs.

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 definition is extremely concise yet information dense. It is highly structured, front-loading the core purpose ('WRITE') before detailing operational constraints and safety measures in the subsequent clauses.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the complexity of a write operation involving two different paths, safety checks, and indexing rules, the description is maximally complete. It provides all the contextual information an agent needs to invoke the tool successfully without needing external lookups.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Due to the 0% schema description coverage, the description must clarify vital semantics. It explicitly states that 'option params take the 1-based index,' which is a critical functional detail not present in the input 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?

The description clearly states the primary action ('WRITE') and the full functionality ('Set a param... and read it back'). Although the tool name is adequate, the description adds necessary context to differentiate this write operation from potential read-only siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The tool provides excellent usage guidelines by defining execution modes (repl vs osc) and safety protocols (dry run vs --live, and confirmation requirements). This guidance is explicit and prevents potential misuse of the parameter setter.

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

Deploy Server