Mooer Prime M2 MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

set_system_byte

Destructive

Writes one raw system-state byte at a specified index (2–98) for experimental configuration changes, blocking preset data and allowing undo via restore_system_state.

Instructions

EXPERIMENTAL: write one raw byte of the system state (index 2-98; the preset byte and name are refused). Use restore_system_state to undo.

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": {
      "index": "<index>",
      "value": "<value>"
    },
    "name": "set_system_byte"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`index`	Yes
`value`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare that this is destructive, non-idempotent, and not read-only. The description adds useful context beyond that: the experimental status, the refused bytes, and the recommended recovery tool, though it does not describe error behavior or the response.

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 compact and front-loaded, with the experimental warning and operation stated first. Every clause contributes either scope, exclusions, or recovery guidance.

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 two-parameter destructive mutation tool with no output schema, the description provides the essential operational boundaries and undo path. It could say a bit more about what success looks like, but the critical safety and scope information is present.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It explains that index refers to a system state byte in the range 2-98 with the preset byte and name refused, and that value is a raw byte, which meaningfully supplements the bare schema constraints.

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, resource, and scope: write one raw byte of the system state, with an explicit index range of 2-98 and exclusions for the preset byte and name. It clearly distinguishes this low-level write from get_system_state and restore_system_state.

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 names restore_system_state as the undo path and marks the tool as experimental, which gives clear usage context. It does not explicitly explain when to prefer this over higher-level sibling setters such as set_global, but the raw-byte framing makes the intended low-level use clear.

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