Skip to main content
Glama
Giancarlo26

obs-action-history

by Giancarlo26

obs_media_status

Verify which OBS media sources are actively playing. It surveys every ffmpeg/vlc input and can sample twice to catch feeds that show PLAYING but never advance.

Instructions

Survey what media sources are actually playing. With no inputName it checks EVERY media input (ffmpeg_source and vlc_source) in one go, which is the form you almost always want: the failure worth catching is 'one of them quietly ended', and you cannot spot that by asking about a source you already suspect.

THE TRAP: mediaState PLAYING does not mean video or audio is arriving. A disconnected SRT feed sits at PLAYING with its cursor frozen at 0 forever - measured on the reference machine, every media input claimed PLAYING and only the cursor separated the working ones from a dead feed. Pass probeMs (e.g. 2000) to take a second sample and get advancing:true/false per source, computed from whether cursorMs actually moved. That is the only honest liveness test.

Why it matters here: background music is an ffmpeg_source named a looping media source whose next track is queued by a Node process listening for MediaInputPlaybackEnded. When that listener dies the source parks in state 'ended' and every other indicator - process table, supervisor, dashboard - stays green. That gap once hid seventeen hours of silence. state:'ended' on a looping media source is the whole diagnosis.

Note durationMs is null for live feeds: OBS returns INT64_MIN, not null, for a stream with no end, so unboundedDuration:true flags a live source rather than a broken one.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
probeMsNoWait this many ms and sample again, reporting advancing:true only if the cursor moved. 2000 is plenty. 0 (default) does a single sample and cannot tell playing from stalled.
inputNameNoOne media input to check. Omit to survey all of them.
inputUuidNoUUID instead of a name. Ignored when surveying all.
Behavior4/5

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

The description is highly transparent about the tool's behavior, explaining that PLAYING does not guarantee media is advancing, and that durationMs can be null for live feeds. It also describes the probeMs parameter and its effect on detecting advancing media, without contradicting any annotations (none provided).

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is excessively verbose and repetitive, using three long paragraphs that essentially repeat the same key points with slightly different wording. This hinders quick comprehension and would benefit from a more concise, structured summary.

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

Completeness4/5

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

The description covers the essential aspects: default behavior, the liveness trap and its solution, and the meaning of durationMs. It provides enough context for an agent to understand the tool's purpose and limitations, though it could be more succinct.

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?

While the schema already provides per-parameter descriptions, the tool description adds valuable context: inputName defaults to checking all inputs, inputUuid is used as an alternative, and probeMs controls a second sample for liveness. This goes beyond the basic schema descriptions.

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 tool surveys which media sources are playing, and explains it checks all inputs by default. It distinguishes itself by highlighting the trap that PLAYING state can be misleading, which is a unique purpose.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides guidance on when to use this tool, especially for diagnosing sources that appear to be playing but may have failed. It suggests using probeMs to detect actual liveness, and clarifies the default behavior when no inputName is given.

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/Giancarlo26/obs-action-history'

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