headrush-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

set_footswitch

DestructiveIdempotent

Assign footswitches 1–6 to control a selected module operation as a toggle with a custom label, or clear a switch with Unassigned; invalid operations are refused and changes apply without saving.

Instructions

Make footswitch 1-6 control one module, without saving.

The switch becomes a Toggle, and name replaces its label. list_footswitch_actions has the valid modules and operations; an operation the pedal doesn't offer is refused. "Unassigned" clears the switch and ignores operation. MIDI Out can't be assigned here.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "switch": "<switch>",
      "module": "<module>"
    },
    "name": "set_footswitch"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`name`	No
`module`	Yes
`switch`	Yes
`operation`	No	On

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, and the description supplies the missing rationale: 'without saving' explains both why the call is repeatable and why it overwrites the existing switch assignment. It also discloses refusal behavior for operations the pedal does not offer and the special 'Unassigned' path, though it never states what the call returns (deferred to the output schema).

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and persistence caveat, then the label, validation, and exception details in descending order of importance. No sentence is redundant and no padding is present.

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?

For a four-parameter mutating tool with annotations and an output schema, this covers the essentials: scope, side effects, validation source, special values, and unsupported targets. The only shortfall is that it leaves the persistence workflow (that a save tool is required afterward) to be inferred from 'without saving'.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the load, and it does most of it: switch is bounded to 1-6, name is identified as the replacement label, operation gains the 'Unassigned' override that causes it to be ignored, and module values are delegated to list_footswitch_actions. The notable gap is that the defaults (name="", operation="On") and their behavior when omitted are never described.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Opens with a concrete verb and resource plus scope: 'Make footswitch 1-6 control one module, without saving.' That immediately separates it from readers like get_footswitches and get_footswitch_settings, and the follow-on sentences add the side effect (becomes a Toggle) and label behavior.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to list_footswitch_actions for valid modules and operations, and names two exclusions: an unsupported operation is refused, and MIDI Out cannot be assigned here. It does not point at the sibling used to read current assignments (get_footswitch_settings), so that one routing decision is left implicit.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.