Axis MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

set_image_settings

Idempotent

Adjust image sensor settings including brightness, contrast, white balance, WDR, and exposure to fine-tune video output.

Instructions

Update image sensor settings (brightness, contrast, white balance, WDR, exposure, etc.).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "set_image_settings"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`wdr`	No	Wide Dynamic Range (on/off)
`channel`	No	Image source channel (default 0)
`contrast`	No	Contrast 0-100
`exposure`	No	Exposure mode (auto, flickerfree50, flickerfree60, hold)
`sharpness`	No	Sharpness 0-100
`brightness`	No	Brightness 0-100
`saturation`	No	Color saturation 0-100
`whiteBalance`	No	White balance mode (auto, manual, hold, fixed_indoor, etc.)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.1Jul 28, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate write, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. Description adds minimal context beyond listing settings; does not disclose persistence, validation, or side effects. Adequate but not enriched.

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?

Single sentence, no fluff, but very brief. Could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) but efficient overall.

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?

Covers purpose but lacks explanation of return values, side effects, or parameter combinability. For a write operation with 8 parameters, more context on usage expectations would be helpful.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. Description merely lists setting categories already present in schema; no added semantics or usage details for individual parameters.

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?

Description clearly states the action ('Update') and resource ('image sensor settings'), listing concrete examples (brightness, contrast, etc.). It distinguishes from sibling get_image_settings by specifying 'update' instead of 'get'.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_image_settings for reading). No prerequisites, context, or when-not-to-use information provided.

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