Skip to main content
Glama
calebn

Podcast MCP

by calebn
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

play_compose_tool

Mix selected tracks for a specific timeline window and optionally play the result without altering the podcast project’s mute, solo, or FX settings.

Instructions

Mix selected tracks for a timeline window and optionally play (no project mutation).

tier is processed (edits+FX stems) or raw (source media). Times are timeline (session) seconds. Does not change mute/solo/FX on the project.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tierNoprocessed
dry_runNo
end_secYes
rerenderNo
start_secYes
track_idsYes
project_pathNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.1.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / project_path / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / project_path / default
      Added value: +null
    • removedInput schema / properties / project_path / type
      Removed value: -"string"
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "project_path",
-  "track_ids",
-  "start_sec",
-  "end_sec"
-]New value: +[
+  "track_ids",
+  "start_sec",
+  "end_sec"
+]
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does add real value by promising no project mutation and specifically that mute/solo/FX are untouched. However, it is silent on how 'play' actually happens when dry_run defaults to true, and on the rerender behavior, leaving the operational side-effects under-specified.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action, with the tier values set off in backticked code. Slight redundancy between 'no project mutation' and 'Does not change mute/solo/FX', though the latter adds specificity.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, and the non-mutation guarantee is covered. But for a 7-parameter tool with no annotations and no schema descriptions, the unaddressed dry_run/rerender semantics leave the agent uncertain about what a default invocation actually does.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It usefully defines ``tier`` (processed = edits+FX stems, raw = source media) and the time unit for start_sec/end_sec ('timeline (session) seconds'), but says nothing about dry_run, rerender, or project_path — a notable gap given dry_run defaults to true.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Mix selected tracks for a timeline window and optionally play.' This clearly separates it from pure playback or render tools, though it never names a sibling (e.g., play_audio_tool, audition_context_tool, render_preview) to disambiguate among the many audition/playback tools in the set.

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?

The parenthetical '(no project mutation)' and the final sentence imply this is a safe, non-destructive preview, but there is no explicit guidance on when to reach for this versus play_audio_tool, audition_context_tool, or render_preview. The agent must infer the use case.

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