Skip to main content
Glama

td_health

Find silently broken TouchDesigner projects that normal errors miss: uncooked branches, disabled outputs, shader compile errors, callback tracebacks, and costly operators. Run after building.

Instructions

Find what is quietly broken — the failures nothing reports.

Run this after building anything, and whenever a composition "looks fine but does nothing". td_errors only covers what TouchDesigner calls an error; this additionally catches:

  • operators that never cook, because a branch nothing displays or records is never pulled and therefore is not running at all

  • output operators switched off (audio device, movie recorder, MIDI, OSC) which produce nothing and report nothing

  • GLSL operators whose shader failed to compile, quoting the compiler's own line: TouchDesigner only warns that an Info DAT would show the details

  • tracebacks raised inside callbacks and extensions (Execute DAT, Replicator, component callbacks), which are kept apart from the error list. A Script operator's onCook raising during a cook Python asked for is not covered — that traceback goes back to the caller instead

  • operators costing more than half a frame to cook, and the resulting frame rate collapse

  • bypassed operators, and the current licence

interval is the gap between the two samples, in seconds, and is capped: this process sleeps through it and answers nothing else meanwhile.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathNo/project1
intervalNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and meets it: it reveals the two-sample design, that interval is capped, and that 'this process sleeps through it and answers nothing else meanwhile' — an important blocking trait. It also discloses output behavior like tracebacks being kept apart from the error list and compiler-line quoting for GLSL.

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?

The description is long but every section earns its place: a scannable bullet list of failure categories, an explicit exclusion, and a note on blocking behavior. Purpose and usage guidance are front-loaded before the detailed taxonomy, and there is no filler.

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 diagnostic tool with no annotations and no schema descriptions, the description covers when to run it, what it checks, what it does not check, and the blocking interval behavior. The main gap is the undocumented path parameter and the unspecified cap value, though the existing output schema reduces the need to describe return values.

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?

The interval parameter gets a full semantic explanation as the gap between two samples with a cap and blocking behavior. However, the path parameter is never mentioned or explained; given 0% schema description coverage, the description only partially compensates for the schema's silence.

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 opens with a concrete mission, 'Find what is quietly broken — the failures nothing reports', then lists specific failure classes it detects, from never-cooking branches to GLSL compile failures and callback tracebacks. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from td_errors, making it easy for an agent to pick the right sibling.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives explicit trigger conditions: 'Run this after building anything, and whenever a composition looks fine but does nothing'. It also states when not to expect coverage (e.g., a Script operator's onCook traceback is not caught) and names td_errors as the narrower alternative.

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

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/grigabyte/td-atlas'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server