Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
propresenter-mcp

propresenter-mcp

by Marc416
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

playlists_set

Update the contents of a specific playlist in ProPresenter to manage presentation sequences and media playback for live events.

Instructions

Update the contents of a specific playlist

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>",
      "contents": "<contents>"
    },
    "name": "playlists_set"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
playlistIdYesThe ID of the playlist
contentsYesThe playlist contents to set

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. 'Update' implies mutation but doesn't specify whether it replaces all contents or merges, what happens to existing items, or if any permissions are required. The behavior of the 'contents' object parameter is entirely opaque.

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?

Single sentence, no wasted words. Could be expanded for clarity but remains appropriately sized for a simple mutation tool.

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?

Despite only two parameters, the tool modifies data and lacks output schema. Description omits return value, error scenarios, and details about 'contents' structure. Incomplete for operational use.

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 coverage is 100% with basic descriptions for both parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, e.g., no details on the structure of the 'contents' object. Baseline 3 is appropriate for full schema coverage.

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?

Description clearly states the tool updates playlist contents, but doesn't differentiate from sibling mutation tools like playlists_trigger_item. The verb 'update' and resource 'contents of a specific playlist' are specific enough to convey the core action.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like playlists_set vs playlists_trigger_item or playlists_trigger. Lacks context on preconditions, such as whether the playlist must exist or if contents replace versus merge.

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