Skip to main content
Glama
DeveloperZo

MCP Audio Tweaker

by DeveloperZo

get_queue_status

Check current audio processing queue status to monitor batch operations and track progress for game audio, voice processing, and music mastering tasks.

Instructions

Get current status of the audio processing queue

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • MCP tool handler implementation that executes get_queue_status by calling audioProcessor.getQueueStatus() and returning the status as JSON response.
    case 'get_queue_status': {
      const status = audioProcessor.getQueueStatus();
      
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text',
            text: JSON.stringify(status, null, 2)
          }
        ]
      };
    }
  • Tool definition object containing the name, description, and input schema (empty object since no parameters required).
    export const getQueueStatusTool: Tool = {
      name: 'get_queue_status',
      description: 'Get current status of the audio processing queue',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {}
      }
    };
  • Registration of getQueueStatusTool in the exported tools array used for MCP server registration.
    export const tools = [
      processAudioFileTool,
      batchProcessAudioTool,
      applyPresetTool,
      listPresetsTool,
      getQueueStatusTool,
      generateVariationsTool,
      createHarmonicsTool,
      advancedProcessTool,
      layerSoundsTool
    ];
  • Core helper method implementation that provides the actual queue status data from the PQueue instance.
    getQueueStatus() {
      return {
        size: this.queue.size,
        pending: this.queue.pending,
        isPaused: this.queue.isPaused
      };
    }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states it 'gets' status, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as whether it requires authentication, returns real-time or cached data, includes error states, or has rate limits. For a status-checking tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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 description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple status-checking tool, making it easy to parse and understand quickly.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. However, without annotations or output schema, it lacks details on what the status includes (e.g., queue length, processing times, errors) or behavioral context. For a status tool, this leaves room for improvement in completeness.

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?

The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description doesn't add parameter details, which is appropriate here. A baseline of 4 is applied for tools with zero parameters, as there's nothing to compensate for.

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 verb ('Get') and resource ('current status of the audio processing queue'), making the purpose unambiguous. It doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like 'list_presets' or 'batch_process_audio', but the focus on queue status is specific enough to avoid confusion with those operations.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., whether audio processing must be active), exclusions, or how it differs from sibling tools like 'process_audio_file' or 'advanced_process' in terms of queue monitoring versus processing actions.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/DeveloperZo/mcp-audio-tweaker'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server