Skip to main content
Glama

Create scheduler

create_scheduler

Create named timers with optional segments and callbacks for actions like cueing, parameter setting, or scripting. Each timer runs in seconds or beats and can loop or autostart.

Instructions

Build a Timer-CHOP scheduler COMP: one or more named timers (seconds or beats), each with an optional ordered segment list, sharing a Callbacks DAT that fires a cue/param/script action on onDone and onSegmentEnter. Atomic timer primitive that create_scene_timeline and other automation rides on. Reuses manage_cue's tdmcp_cues storage for the default 'cue' action - store target cues first with manage_cue.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
timersYesOne or more named timers built inside the scheduler COMP. Each becomes a Timer CHOP + segment Table DAT, all sharing one Callbacks DAT.
nameNoName of the scheduler engine COMP (a containerCOMP) created inside parent_path. Re-running with the same name reuses it.scheduler
parent_pathNoParent COMP path the scheduler COMP is created inside./project1
actionNoWhat the callbacks fire. 'cue': recall a cue (reuses manage_cue's tdmcp_cues). 'param': set target.par.param. 'script': artist-edited stub.cue
targetNo(action cue/param) COMP the callback acts on. For 'cue', store the cues first with manage_cue.
paramNo(action param) Custom-parameter name on target the callback sets.
on_done_valueNo(action param) Value written to target.par.param on onDone.
expose_controlsNoAppend an Active toggle on the scheduler COMP, so a dashboard can pause callback dispatch live.
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations include openWorldHint=true, so the description's mention of reusing manage_cue's storage adds valuable side-effect disclosure. It also details internal components (Timer-CHOP, Callbacks DAT, segment Table DAT). However, it doesn't fully describe all potential side effects (e.g., overwriting existing comps with the same name) or behavior under repeated calls, which the schema's reuse hint suggests.

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?

The description is three concise sentences, each serving a clear purpose: defining the build, explaining its role in the system, and noting a critical dependency. It is front-loaded with the primary function and avoids any filler or repetition.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description covers the tool's purpose and key behavior, but lacks details about output (e.g., what the tool returns, likely the COMP path), limitations (e.g., number of timers, parent path restrictions), and idempotency considerations hinted by the schema's reuse note. These gaps leave an agent with incomplete knowledge for successful invocation.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, each parameter already has a description. The tool description does not add new information about individual parameters beyond what the schema provides. While it reinforces the dependency on manage_cue, it does not explain parameter interplay or constraints beyond the schema's defaults.

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 it builds a Timer-CHOP scheduler COMP with named timers, segments, and callbacks. It explicitly differentiates itself from create_scene_timeline by calling itself an 'atomic timer primitive' that higher-level automation rides on, making its specific role clear among siblings.

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 implies usage context by stating it is an atomic primitive for create_scene_timeline and other automation, suggesting it's for building low-level timers rather than high-level timelines. It also mentions the dependency on manage_cue for the 'cue' action, guiding the agent to use manage_cue first. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative recommendations.

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/Pantani/tdmcp'

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