Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
propresenter-mcp

propresenter-mcp

by Marc416
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

playlists_get_thumbnail

Retrieve thumbnail images for specific playlist items in ProPresenter to preview content before playback or display.

Instructions

Get thumbnail for a specific playlist item

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": {
      "playlistId": "<playlistId>",
      "index": "<index>",
      "cueIndex": "<cueIndex>"
    },
    "name": "playlists_get_thumbnail"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
playlistIdYesThe ID of the playlist
indexYesThe item index
cueIndexYesThe cue index within the item

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states 'Get thumbnail', implying a read operation, but fails to disclose behavioral traits such as whether the thumbnail is an image URL or binary data, or any side effects. This is minimal for a read tool.

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 description is a single concise sentence that gets to the point. However, it is too brief and could benefit from a bit more context, but there is no fluff or redundancy.

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

Completeness2/5

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

The description lacks information about the return value (e.g., format, URL, binary). With no output schema, the agent is left guessing what the tool returns. Given the tool's simplicity, this missing detail is a significant gap.

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?

All three parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage), clearly defining 'playlistId', 'index', and 'cueIndex'. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'thumbnail', specifying it is for a 'specific playlist item'. This precisely distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_presentation_thumbnail' or 'playlists_get_active_presentation_thumbnail'.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'playlists_get_active_presentation_thumbnail' or other thumbnail getters. There are no usage context or exclusion criteria, leaving the agent without decision support.

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