Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ASCII Motion MCP

ASCII Motion MCP

by CameronFoxly
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

update_effect_block

Modify an effect block's start frame, duration, settings, or enabled state to control ASCII art animation behavior.

Instructions

Update a procedural effect block's settings, timing, or enabled state.

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": {
      "blockId": "<blockId>"
    },
    "name": "update_effect_block"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
blockIdYesEffect block ID to update
startFrameNoNew start frame
durationFramesNoNew duration in frames
enabledNoEnable/disable the effect
settingsNoSettings to merge (partial update)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.1.4

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It indicates mutation but does not explain partial update semantics (e.g., settings merge behavior), idempotency, error conditions, or side effects. The description is too brief for a mutation tool.

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?

A single sentence with 10 words, directly stating the tool's capability. It is concise and front-loaded, though could include slightly more context without becoming verbose.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given there is no output schema, no annotations, and 5 parameters (including a nested object), the description is insufficient. It does not explain return values, error handling, or that the block must exist. A more complete description is needed for a mutation tool with this complexity.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds 'settings, timing, or enabled state' which groups parameters but does not provide new semantic insight beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it updates a procedural effect block's settings, timing, or enabled state. The verb 'update' and resource are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like add_effect_block or remove_effect_block.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., the block must exist) or when not to use it. No explicit exclusions or references to other tools.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools