3dBlock Studio

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

qc_take

Read-only

Verify a take against series target length, -14 LUFS loudness, loop seam (first vs last frame), and copyright checklist to catch QC issues before publishing.

Instructions

Check a take: length against the series target, loudness (-14 LUFS), the loop seam (first vs last frame), and the copyright checklist.

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": {
      "slug": "<slug>",
      "take": "<take>"
    },
    "name": "qc_take"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slug`	Yes	episode slug, e.g. the-cursed-tape (or an example slug for read-only tools)
`take`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 2, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description is consistent with a non-mutating inspection. It adds real context beyond the annotations by naming the concrete checks and even the loudness threshold (-14 LUFS), so the agent knows what gets evaluated. It stops short of saying whether the result is a pass/fail verdict or a detailed report, which for a QC tool would be the final piece of transparency.

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?

A single compact sentence that front-loads the verb and then lists the checks in scan-friendly order. Every clause carries a distinct check; there is no filler.

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?

For a 2-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers what is inspected but not what comes back (per-check pass/fail vs free-form report) nor the meaning of the undocumented 'take' parameter. Adequate to call, but an agent cannot predict the response shape.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Only 'slug' is documented in the schema (episode slug example); 'take' is a bare integer with no explanation in either schema or description. The description's phrase 'a take' does not clarify that this is a take index scoped within the episode identified by slug, so it fails to compensate for the 50% coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Check a take') and enumerates the exact dimensions checked: length vs series target, loudness to -14 LUFS, loop seam first-vs-last frame, and copyright checklist. This clearly separates it from siblings like pick_take, list_takes, and open_take, which retrieve or select takes rather than validate them.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Use is implied by the enumerated checks — an agent can infer this is the validation step before pick_take — but the description never says when to run it (e.g. after render_take, before picking) nor when not to. No sibling tool is named as an alternative or a prerequisite.

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