Skip to main content
Glama

Create beat-grid sequencer

create_beat_grid_sequencer

Creates a beat-synced step-grid sequencer in TouchDesigner, using a Table DAT for per-step patterns and firing parameter or cue actions on each beat boundary for rhythmic automation.

Instructions

Build a programmable step-grid sequencer driven by a Beat CHOP on the global TD tempo: a Table DAT holds the per-step pattern (values or 1/0 flags), and a CHOP Execute DAT fires on every beat boundary, reads the current step (count % steps) from the table, and dispatches — action=param sets a custom parameter to the step value; action=cue recalls the cue for active steps (cues stored with manage_cue). The deterministic, repeating-rhythm instrument between create_autopilot (random drift) and create_cue_sequencer (linear list): program a strobe on beats 1+3, a hue shift on the bar, etc. Reprogramme the grid live by editing the step_table DAT. NOTE: beat-callback timing is UNVERIFIED offline — check op().time.play if steps don't fire when the TD timeline is paused.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoName for the sequencer COMP.beat_grid
paramNo(action=param) The custom-parameter name on the target COMP to set on each active step.
stepsNoNumber of steps in the grid (e.g. 16 = one bar of 16th notes at 4/4).
actionNoparam: set a target custom-parameter value per active step; cue: recall a named cue per active step (cues stored with manage_cue).param
targetYesCOMP whose parameter or cue each active step fires on a beat boundary.
patternNoPer-step values (action=param) or 1/0 active flags (action=cue); length should match 'steps'. Omit to auto-generate an example pattern.
bpm_sourceNoPath to an existing Beat CHOP or tempo source. Omit to create a new Beat CHOP (on the global TD tempo).
parent_pathNoParent COMP path to create the sequencer inside./project1
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true), the description discloses the internal architecture (Table DAT, CHOP Execute, count % steps), how actions dispatch, and a critical unverified timing caveat with a suggested workaround. This is substantial behavioral context that helps the agent anticipate side effects and edge cases.

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 dense but every sentence contributes: purpose, mechanism, differentiation, examples, live-edit tip, and a critical caveat. It is well-structured, starting with the main purpose and ending with a warning, with no filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a complex tool with 8 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the architecture, both action modes, typical use cases, and the timing limitation. It gives enough detail for an agent to decide whether this tool fits a request and what parameters matter.

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?

Even though schema coverage is 100%, the description adds operational meaning: it explains how 'pattern' relates to action (values vs 1/0 flags), how 'steps' is used in count % steps, and how 'param' and 'cue' actions behave. It links 'target' to the COMP being fired on beat boundaries, adding more than the bare schema fields.

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 the tool builds a programmable step-grid sequencer driven by a Beat CHOP, with a specific mechanism (Table DAT + CHOP Execute) and explicit differentiation from create_autopilot and create_cue_sequencer. It includes concrete examples (strobe on beats 1+3, hue shift) that make the purpose unmistakable.

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?

The description explicitly positions this tool as the 'deterministic, repeating-rhythm instrument between create_autopilot (random drift) and create_cue_sequencer (linear list)', giving clear when-to-use guidance. It also notes live reprogramming via the step_table DAT and distinguishes the two action modes.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/lucasmaher-hash/touch-designer-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server