Skip to main content
Glama
TwelveTake-Studios

reaper-mcp

by TwelveTake-Studios
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

render_project

Destructive

Export a REAPER project's master mix to an audio file, with optional time range, reverb tail, and overwrite control.

Instructions

Render the project's master mix to an audio file (uses REAPER's last render settings for format details; a .wav extension selects WAV output).

If the target file already exists, this returns an error unless overwrite=True (which deletes the existing file first). This is explicit because REAPER's own behavior on existing files (prompt vs auto-increment) is a user preference, and the overwrite prompt blocks unattended rendering.

Args: output_path: Full path for output file (extension determines format). start_time: Start time in seconds (None = project start). end_time: End time in seconds (None = project end). tail_seconds: Extra seconds to render at end for reverb tails. overwrite: True to replace an existing file at output_path.

Returns: Object with render status and REAPER's computed output target(s).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
end_timeNo
overwriteNo
start_timeNo
output_pathYes
tail_secondsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.7.3

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true, and the description adds substantial context beyond that: format is inherited from REAPER's last render settings, a .wav extension forces WAV, and overwrite=True deletes the existing file first. This is exactly the extra detail annotations cannot convey.

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 opening sentence is front-loaded and the error/overwrite behavior follows logically. The middle rationale paragraph is slightly long and partially restates the overwrite parameter, but every element remains useful.

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

Completeness5/5

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

With no output schema, the description still summarizes the return ('render status and REAPER's computed output target(s)'), covers the overwrite hazard, and documents every parameter. Nothing needed to call this destructive render correctly is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description carries the whole burden and does so well, documenting all five parameters including non-obvious semantics: extension-driven format selection, None defaults mapping to project start/end, and tail_seconds for reverb tails.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Render the project's master mix to an audio file') with a clear scope that separates it from region-based rendering. An agent can identify the operation immediately without opening the schema.

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?

It explains the critical precondition for use: an existing target file raises an error unless overwrite=True, and it justifies why (unattended rendering, REAPER's prompt behavior). It does not name render_region as the alternative for non-master-mix rendering, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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