tdmcp

Connect ARKit Face Capture

connect_arkit_face_capture

Create an ARKit Face Capture OSC scaffold with blendshape and head-transform maps for iPhone-driven facial performance in TouchDesigner.

Instructions

Create an ARKit Face Capture OSC scaffold with blendshape and head-transform maps for iPhone-driven facial performance.

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": "connect_arkit_face_capture"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	No	Generated baseCOMP name.	arkit_face_capture
`active`	No
`face_count`	No
`parent_path`	No	Parent COMP for the ARKit scaffold.	/project1
`receive_port`	No
`blendshape_count`	No
`include_head_transform`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.13.1Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate this is not read-only, not destructive, and open-world. The description adds that it creates a scaffold with specific maps, which is helpful but doesn't disclose side effects, dependencies, or prerequisites beyond that.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that states the core action and key components with no filler. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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?

For a 7-parameter tool with no output schema and low schema coverage, this description is under-specified. It omits how the scaffold behaves, prerequisites (e.g., iPhone app, OSC setup), and what happens after creation, leaving the agent with insufficient context to use the tool effectively.

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?

With schema description coverage at only 29%, the description should compensate but doesn't mention any parameters. It only vaguely references 'blendshape and head-transform maps' without explaining how parameters like face_count or include_head_transform relate. The schema provides defaults but the description adds no parameter clarity.

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 uses a specific verb 'Create' and a specific resource 'ARKit Face Capture OSC scaffold' with details about blendshape and head-transform maps. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools by targeting a niche ARKit/OSC workflow.

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?

The phrase 'for iPhone-driven facial performance' implies the usage context, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like setup_face_tracking or other connect_* tools. No exclusions are mentioned.

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

Deploy Server