Skip to main content
Glama
calebn

Podcast MCP

by calebn
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

set_envelope

Set a track's volume automation envelope from time/value points; conflict checks stop overwrites of edits made since your last read.

Instructions

Set the volume automation envelope for a track from [{time, value}] points.

Submits a SetEnvelope document command (same lock, conflict check, undo history, and GUI fanout as a DAW edit). expected_points is the [{id, time, value}] list you last read; if the envelope changed since, the call fails with a conflict instead of overwriting the edit. When omitted, the envelope as read at call time is the baseline.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pointsYes
track_idYes
project_pathNo
expected_pointsNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed7 schema fields changedv0.1.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / expected_points
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": true,
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Expected Points"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / points
      Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "additionalProperties": true,
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "title": "Points",
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / points_json
      Removed value: -{
-  "title": "Points Json",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • 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_id",
-  "points_json"
-]New value: +[
+  "track_id",
+  "points"
+]
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden well: it discloses that this submits a SetEnvelope document command with lock, conflict check, undo history, and GUI fanout. It also explains the optimistic-concurrency failure mode via expected_points, though it does not mention permissions or rate limits.

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 description is compact and front-loaded with the core action, then covers concurrency and undo behavior. It is dense but every sentence adds useful information.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a mutation tool with no annotations and an output schema, the description supplies the critical behavioral context: command nature, conflict handling, undo history, and baseline semantics. Remaining gaps are parameter details such as project_path and point value units.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the points format and expected_points conflict semantics, but track_id and project_path receive no added explanation, and value units for envelope points are not specified.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: set the volume automation envelope for a track from time/value points. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools such as track_set_volume_tool.

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?

Usage is implied by the automation-envelope purpose and the conflict-check description, but the text never says when to use this tool instead of track_set_volume_tool or other editing tools. It describes conflict behavior but not alternative-selection 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