Skip to main content
Glama
GaNotchVFX

touchbridge

by GaNotchVFX
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

data_top

Inspect TouchDesigner TOP operator resolution and optionally capture pixels as base64 PNG. Choose detail levels or JSON/YAML output for efficient debugging.

Instructions

TOP resolution, optionally base64 PNG pixel capture.

path (<class 'str'>): TOP operator path.

pixels (bool | None): Capture pixels as base64 PNG.

max_width (int | None): Downscale if wider (default 512).

max_height (int | None): Downscale if taller (default 512).

detail (str | None): full (default) | summary (long lists cut to 25 + count) | minimal (top-level scalars only).

response_format (str | None): yaml (default, token-cheap) | json.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes
detailNo
pixelsNo
max_widthNo
max_heightNo
response_formatNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.4.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / detail
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Detail"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / response_format
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Response Format"
+}
  2. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose useful behaviors: pixel capture can be downscaled via max_width/max_height, long lists are truncated to 25 items, and YAML is the token-cheap default. But it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or describe error handling, leaving some gaps.

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?

The definition is a compact, scannable bullet list with inline defaults and enum values. The opening line is brief and the parameter explanations are efficient. It could benefit from a short prose example, but nothing in the current text is wasted.

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?

Parameter semantics are strong, but there is no output schema and no explanation of the return payload structure. An agent cannot fully predict what 'full' versus 'minimal' actually returns, nor how the pixel capture is attached to the response. For a simple read tool these are moderate gaps, not fatal ones.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description compensates fully. Every parameter gets a clear semantic: 'path' is the TOP operator path, 'pixels' toggles base64 PNG capture, max_width/max_height explain downscaling, 'detail' defines output levels, and 'response_format' specifies formats and defaults. This exceeds the bare 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 opens with 'TOP resolution, optionally base64 PNG pixel capture,' which names a specific resource (TOP) and the main actions. It distinguishes itself from data_chop, data_sop, and data_dat by being TOP-specific. However, 'resolution' is slightly ambiguous since the detail parameter implies the tool can return broader structured data than just resolution.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like data_chop, data_sop, data_dat, or data_pixel_sample. No conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions are provided, so the agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name and sparse description.

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