Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crystalize

Crystalize

by Peyton-C
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

load_mix

Load a saved mix by name to apply its deck, key, and tempo settings in FUSER, then review or adjust the plan.

Instructions

A saved plan, to change and check again.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "load_mix"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

D1.5/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it says nothing about whether loading replaces current state, mutates live playback, requires an existing saved mix, or fails when the name is unknown. It does not even clarify whether this is a read or a state-changing operation.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

It is short, but it is under-specified rather than concise: a fragment with no front-loaded verb or actionable detail. The clause 'to change and check again' is too vague to orient the agent.

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

Completeness1/5

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

For a load operation with one required lookup parameter, no annotations, and no output schema, the description omits the essentials: what is loaded, what state changes, and how the name is used. An agent cannot safely invoke this tool from the definition.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

There is one required parameter, 'name', with 0% schema description coverage, and the description never explains that it is the saved plan's name, how it is matched, or what happens for unknown names. The description does not compensate for the schema's lack of parameter documentation.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description is a noun fragment ('A saved plan') rather than a verb+resource statement, so it never says the tool loads, restores, or retrieves a saved mix. It vaguely points at the right domain but does not distinguish load_mix from siblings like play_mix, save_mix, or list_mixes.

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?

'to change and check again' hints at loading a plan for editing/verification, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative named. An agent cannot tell whether to use this versus play_mix or get_state from the description alone.

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