Gizmos Audacity MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Probe File

audacity_probe_file

Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect an audio/video file's container, duration, audio codecs, sample rate, channels, and stream metadata before importing or exporting—without changing Audacity.

Instructions

Inspect an audio/video file before importing or exporting: container, duration, audio codecs, sample rate, channels and stream metadata. Requires optional ffprobe (installed with ffmpeg); reads the file without changing Audacity.

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": {
      "file": "<file>"
    },
    "name": "audacity_probe_file"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`file`	Yes
`timeoutMs`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`file`	Yes
`format`	Yes
`streams`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/openWorld, and the description adds genuinely non-redundant context: the optional ffprobe dependency (shipped with ffmpeg) and the guarantee that it reads without modifying Audacity. It does not say what happens when ffprobe is missing, which is the one behavioral gap left.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, with the output scope front-loaded and the operational caveats (dependency, non-mutating) trailing. Nothing is repeated from name or title.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description covers purpose, dependency and safety for a simple probe tool. It falls short only on the timeout parameter and failure mode when ffprobe is unavailable.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% for two parameters, so the description must carry the load and it does not: neither the 'file' path format (absolute vs relative, size limits) nor 'timeoutMs' (default 30s, 1–120s range, what the timeout applies to) is mentioned. Only the verb 'Inspect an audio/video file' loosely implies the file argument.

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 names a concrete verb ('Inspect') and resource ('an audio/video file') and enumerates exactly what it reports: container, duration, audio codecs, sample rate, channels and stream metadata. That is far more specific than a tautology, but it never names or contrasts a sibling such as audacity_measure_file or audacity_describe, so an agent must infer the boundary itself.

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 supplies clear usage context ('before importing or exporting'), which tells the agent where in a workflow this belongs. It stops short of explicit exclusions or an alternative, so there is no 'use X instead when...' guidance.

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

Deploy Server