Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
waveform-MCP

waveform-MCP

by jarmstrong158
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

waveform_preset_list

List available factory presets, optionally filtered by plugin category such as 4OSC or Compressor. Returns category folders or individual .trkpreset files.

Instructions

List available factory presets. Without args, returns the plugin category folders (4OSC, Compressor, etc.). With category, lists individual .trkpreset files in that category.

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": "waveform_preset_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
categoryNoPlugin category folder name, e.g. '4OSC'

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the two distinct output behaviors and implies a read-only operation (listing). It does not mention error cases like invalid categories, but for a simple listing tool this is acceptable.

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 two sentences with zero filler. It leads with the purpose and immediately explains the two modes, making it easy to parse.

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 low-complexity listing tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential information: what it returns in each mode. It could optionally mention exact category names or error behavior, but it is sufficient for correct invocation.

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?

The schema already documents the 'category' parameter (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context by explaining how the parameter changes the output, which elevates it to 4.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('factory presets'), and clearly differentiates behavior based on whether the optional 'category' parameter is provided. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'waveform_preset_read' by focusing on listing rather than reading a specific preset.

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 explicitly explains when to call without args (to get category folders) and with the 'category' arg (to get individual files). It does not directly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the two-mode guidance is clear and actionable.

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