Mooer Prime M2 MCP

by lucanenni

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Local

midi_edit

Destructive

Learn, remove, or save MIDI assignments for pedal functions to map incoming MIDI messages and clear unwanted mappings.

Instructions

Edit MIDI assignments. learn: the pedal listens up to 20 s for an incoming MIDI message for function N (verified over Bluetooth only; USB may not answer). remove: clear function N. save: store learned assignments. Seen on hardware: remove(6) then save also cleared function 1; check midi_assignments afterwards.

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": {
      "action": "<action>"
    },
    "name": "midi_edit"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`action`	Yes
`function`	No	1-based, as in midi_assignments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Adds substantial behavior beyond the annotations: the learn timeout, Bluetooth-only verification, USB unreliability, a hardware bug where remove(6) plus save also cleared function 1, and the instruction to verify afterwards. This is consistent with the destructiveHint=true annotation.

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?

Front-loads the purpose, then uses compact action-by-action clauses and a clearly marked hardware caveat. Every sentence carries useful operational information.

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?

Covers the action semantics, timing, connectivity limits, and a critical hardware risk, which is strong for a destructive editing tool with no output schema. It still leaves the scope of the function parameter for save and the direct return behavior somewhat implicit.

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?

Compensates for the 50% schema coverage by explaining what each action enum value does and how function N is used for learn and remove. It does not clarify whether function is required for learn/remove or ignored for save.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Edit MIDI assignments') and explains the three action variants. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling read tool by telling the agent to check midi_assignments afterwards.

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?

Gives explicit per-action guidance for learn, remove, and save, including the 20-second listening window and Bluetooth-versus-USB caveat. It also names midi_assignments as the verification path after edits.

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