modularsynth-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Highlight

highlight

Read-only

Makes a module, knob, or jack glow and scroll into view, optionally drawing a dotted cable to a target so users can see what to turn or patch.

Instructions

Show the user a module, a knob or a jack by making it glow in the rack for a few seconds (the rack scrolls to it). target: "moduleId", "moduleId:setting" or "moduleId:port". With "to" (an input "moduleId:port") and an output as target, it draws the cable to plug as a dotted line. Use it when you explain or ask the user to turn or patch something.

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": {
      "target": "<target>"
    },
    "name": "highlight"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`to`	No
`target`	Yes
`seconds`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.3.1Nov 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/destructiveHint=false, and the description corroborates that this is purely visual, adding that the effect is transient (a few seconds) and that the rack scrolls to the target — a side effect on the user's viewport worth knowing. It does not cover failure behavior for an invalid target, keeping it at 4.

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?

Front-loaded with the effect, then target syntax, then the 'to' variant, then when to use it — no filler. The 'to' sentence is slightly convoluted ("an input \"moduleId:port\" and an output as target") but still parses on a second read.

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?

A low-complexity, non-destructive UI tool with no output schema; the description covers effect, target grammar, the cable-preview variant and the trigger condition. Only the return value and invalid-target handling are unaddressed, which is minor here.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the burden and largely does: it spells out the three accepted target formats ("moduleId", "moduleId:setting", "moduleId:port") and the meaning of 'to' as an input port forming a dotted cable. 'seconds' is only hinted at ("a few seconds") and its 1–30 range is left to the schema.

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 concrete verb and effect: make a module, knob or jack glow in the rack for a few seconds, with auto-scroll. It is unmistakably a UI-attention tool and cannot be confused with siblings like set_param or connect, which actually change state.

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?

"Use it when you explain or ask the user to turn or patch something" gives a clear triggering situation, and the 'to' sentence describes a specific usage mode (cable preview). No explicit exclusions or named alternatives, so it stops short of a 5.

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