Skip to main content
Glama
Hachimeder

maxplus2-mcp

by Hachimeder
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Extract valid output events and viewing interval

waveform_results
Read-onlyIdempotent

Extract MAX+plus II SCF/TBL result events gated by a scalar valid signal, using rising edges or valid-high samples, settling delay, pagination, and a recommended ns view window.

Instructions

Extract result events gated by an actual scalar valid signal. Default proven rising edges, with initial-high rows separately marked; optional samples means native rows while valid=1. Optional settling samples point-in-time data inside the valid window. Retains raw numeric/X/Z tokens, missing columns and unknowns; held data while valid is low creates no result. Return paginated events and a recommended ns window; does not alter SCF zoom, row visibility, clock or design logic.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
edgeNoDefault rising. samples selects native valid-high rows, not uniform sampling.
pathYesFile path within the selected scope.
limitNoEvent count, default20; may reduce to fit output budget.
offsetNoResult event offset, default0.
maxRowsNoTBL row parsing budget, default200000.
projectNoExisting ACF whose directory scopes files.
settleNsNoSampling delay after valid entry, default0; must remain in the same valid window.
endTimeNsNoInclusive event-range end in ns, default last native time.
maxEventsNoTotal event budget before pagination, default100000.
paddingNsNoRecommended view padding, default1000ns.
workspaceNoWorkspace scope when no project is selected.
kindSignalNoOptional type discriminator column, e.g. OUT_KIND; no semantics inferred.
dataSignalsYesActual result columns, e.g. OUTBUS[7..0].
startTimeNsNoInclusive event-range start in ns, default first native time.
validSignalYesReal scalar valid column, e.g. OUT_VALID.
maxComparisonsNoTBL analysis comparison budget, default2000000.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.10.3

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations cover the read-only/idempotent/non-destructive profile, and the description goes well beyond them: it discloses what is retained (raw numeric/X/Z tokens, missing columns, unknowns), that held data while valid is low yields no result, and what is returned (paginated events plus a recommended ns window). It also explicitly states the tool does not mutate SCF/design state.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then dense but information-bearing clauses separated by semicolons. Every clause carries semantics (modes, retention, non-mutation); the density slightly hurts readability but little is wasted.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description appropriately names the return shape (paginated events and a recommended ns window). For a 16-param, no-output-schema tool it covers modes, retention rules, and non-mutation, with only permissions and pagination mechanics left implicit in the schema.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all 16 parameters are already documented. The description reinforces the edge/samples distinction and confirms settling samples stay inside the valid window, but adds little beyond the schema on limit/offset/budget parameters.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Extract result events gated by an actual scalar valid signal,' which is far more precise than the tautological title. It distinguishes itself from plain signal listing (waveform_signals) by describing gating and event extraction, though it never names a sibling explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Defaults are given (proven rising edges, samples mode) and scope constraints are implied ('does not alter SCF zoom, row visibility, clock or design logic'), but there is no explicit when-to-use versus waveform_signals or parse_tbl. Usage must be inferred from behavioral prose.

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