Stop a specific TidalCycles channel (d1-d9) with a targeted silence, more precise than the hush command.
Stop a specific channel. More graceful than hush for single channels.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| channel | Yes | The channel to silence (d1-d9) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description states the core behavior (stop/silence) and adds a graceful-vs-hush nuance. However, it does not clarify whether stop is reversible, what state changes occur, or whether any side effects affect playback.
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?
One short sentence with two clauses, front-loaded action, no filler. Every word contributes either the action or the sibling comparison.
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 a single required enum parameter and no output schema, the description is nearly complete for invocation. It could be slightly stronger by saying explicitly what the resulting channel state is or how this differs from hush behaviorally, but the tool is simple enough that little is missing.
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 coverage is 100% and the channel parameter is fully enumerated (d1-d9), so the schema already carries the parameter meaning. The description adds little beyond the singular 'specific channel' notion, which is consistent with the schema.
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 'Stop' with a specific resource 'a specific channel' and the required channel parameter is documented via enum. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tidal_hush by positioning itself as 'more graceful' for one channel, so an agent can tell them apart.
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?
It gives clear comparative guidance: use this over tidal_hush for single channels. It does not spell out exclusions or mention other sibling tools like tidal_solo/tidal_unsolo, but the context is sufficient for basic routing.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.