Read parameter values from a TouchDesigner operator path, optionally filtering by a glob pattern like 't[xyz]' to select specific parameters.
Read parameter values, optionally filtered by glob.
path (<class 'str'>): Operator path.
pattern (str | None): Glob like 't[xyz]'; None = all.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | Yes | ||
| pattern | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the safety/behavior disclosure. 'Read' signals non-destructive, but there is no mention of return shape, error behavior if path doesn't exist, or globbing semantics beyond one simple example.
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?
The core verb and purpose appear in the first sentence)Skip or precede? The param descriptions are compact and informative dat. Minimal waste; maybe slightly terse but earns its place.
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?
For a low-complexity 2-param read tool, the description covers inputs but not output/return format or error behavior. With no output schema and no annotations, an agent doesn't know what the tool returns. Acceptable, but incomplete.
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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does define path as 'Operator path' and explains the pattern with an example ('t[xyz]') and default behavior ('None = all'), which is more than the schema provides. Still terse; the path semantics are minimal.
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?
The description uses a specific verb ('Read') and a clear resource ('parameter values'), and the optional glob filter helps distinguish it from the sibling par_get_all. It is concise and unambiguous about what the tool does.
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?
The description implies usage with a path and optional glob, but gives no explicit guidance on when to prefer par_get over par_get_all, nor any exclusions. The 'None = all' note hints at behavior but doesn't help an agent choose between siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.