Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
StreamXpress MCP Server

StreamXpress MCP Server

by FasenChen
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Remote

set_asi_params

Configure ASI output for TS streams by setting remux mode, packet format, and playout rate to ensure correct transmission over ASI interfaces.

Instructions

Set ASI output parameters.

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": "set_asi_params"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
remuxNoEnable real-time remultiplexing (add null packets to match output rate)
tx_modeNo0=188-byte packets, 2=204-byte (Add16), 3=188-from-204 (Min16)
playout_rateNoOutput rate in bps (0 = use file native rate)

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it merely restates the tool's action. It does not mention side effects, whether settings apply immediately, whether a restart is needed, or any dependencies.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is a single compact sentence with no wasted words, which is structurally concise. However, it is under-specified rather than helpfully concise, omitting context that would aid tool selection and invocation.

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?

For a tool with no annotations, this description is insufficient: it lacks usage guidelines, behavioral context, and sibling differentiation. The presence of an output schema and full input schema reduces the need for return-value documentation, but the tool still needs more contextual guidance.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, but the schema already documents remux, tx_mode, and playout_rate.

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 'Set ASI output parameters' clearly names the verb (set) and resource (ASI output parameters), matching the tool name. However, it does not explain what ASI is or differentiate this from sibling tools like set_tsoip_params or set_rf_params.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as set_rate or the other *_params tools. There are no prerequisites, context, or exclusions stated, leaving the agent to guess.

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