wwise-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

wwise_query

Run read-only WAQL queries against an open Wwise project to retrieve audio project data, such as events and sound structures, with optional field filtering and result limits.

Instructions

Run a read-only WAQL query against the open Wwise project.

waql example: '$ from type Event where name : "Footstep"'. Results are capped.

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": {
      "waql": "<waql>"
    },
    "name": "wwise_query"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`waql`	Yes
`fields`	No
`max_results`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jun 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It conveys read-only behavior and capping of results, but lacks details on authentication, rate limits, or what happens on empty results.

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 extremely concise: two sentences with no wasted words. It includes an example and key constraint (capped results).

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema, no annotations, and three parameters with zero description coverage, the description is insufficient. It lacks return format, parameter details, and behavioral nuances, making it incomplete for a query tool.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%. The description provides an example for 'waql' but does not explain 'fields' or 'max_results' parameters. 'max_results' is weakly implied by 'results are capped', but 'fields' is entirely unexplained.

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 clearly states 'Run a read-only WAQL query against the open Wwise project' with an example query. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that perform other actions like creating, moving, or generating soundbanks.

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?

The description specifies it is a read-only query and mentions results are capped, giving some usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare to alternatives like wwise_inspect.

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