Audionaut MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Pan a track

track_pan

Set a track's channel strip pan position from -1 (hard left) to 1 (hard right), or center at 0. Adjust all strips or one channel; playback and export follow the setting.

Instructions

Sets the pan position of a track's channel strips, -1 (hard left) to 1 (hard right), 0 centred - the pan slider of the channel view. Every strip of the track by default, one with channel. A mono stem has one strip; a stereo import's two strips start at -1 and 1. Playback and export_audio both follow it; get_project_info shows the current pans per track.

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": {
      "project": "<project>",
      "track": "<track>",
      "pan": "<pan>"
    },
    "name": "track_pan"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`pan`	Yes	Pan position, -1 left .. 0 centre .. 1 right
`task`	No	Name of the task this edit is part of, e.g. "remove speech pauses". In the open app, all edits with the same task name become one undo step: keep the name for every call of the task and change it when the next task starts. Without a task name, all edits of this session share one step
`track`	Yes	Track id
`channel`	No	One channel strip (0-based; default: all)
`project`	Yes	Path to the .audium project package (absolute paths recommended)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.7.0Oct 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description does real work: it defines the value range and direction, states the default scope (all strips unless channel is given), explains mono vs stereo strip counts, and discloses that playback and export_audio both honor the change. It stops short of saying the edit is undoable or what a partial failure looks like, but the behavioral picture is well above minimal.

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 action and value range in one sentence, followed by scope and effects. Three sentences, no filler, though the fragment "Every strip of the track by default, one with channel" is slightly compressed and reads awkwardly.

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 5-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers value semantics, default scope, and downstream effects on playback and export. Only the undo/task grouping effect and confirmation of return behavior are missing, and the task parameter's schema already documents the undo grouping.

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 100%, so baseline is 3; the description still adds meaning by explaining that pan applies to every strip by default and that a stereo import's two strips start at -1 and +1, which shapes how the pan value is interpreted. The task/undo parameter is left entirely 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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource: "Sets the pan position of a track's channel strips," and anchors it to a concrete UI concept ("the pan slider of the channel view"). The scope qualifier (whole track vs one channel) makes it unambiguously distinct from level/gain siblings like clip_gain.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by the verb rather than stated, and no competing alternative is named. It does usefully point at get_project_info as the way to read current pans, which gives partial routing context, but there is no explicit "use this when / not when" guidance.

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