tdmcp

Create Scalable Display bus

create_scalable_display_bus

Generate a scalable display TOP scaffold for TouchDesigner, including tile maps, status, and calibration setup notes.

Instructions

Create a Scalable Display TOP scaffold with display tile maps, status, and calibration setup notes.

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": "create_scalable_display_bus"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	No	Generated baseCOMP name.	scalable_display_bus
`active`	No
`config_file`	No	Path to the Scalable Display configuration file.
`parent_path`	No	Parent COMP for the Scalable Display scaffold.	/project1
`canvas_width`	No
`canvas_height`	No
`display_count`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.13.1Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate a non-read-only, non-destructive creation behavior. The description adds that the scaffold includes tile maps, status, and calibration notes, but doesn't disclose potential side-effects like whether existing components are modified or overwritten.

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?

One concise sentence, front-loaded with the action and result. No filler; the details about tile maps, status, and calibration notes are relevant and earn their place.

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 creation tool with 7 parameters and no output schema, this single sentence is insufficient. It fails to explain parameter roles, expected outcomes, or any setup prerequisites, making it incomplete for effective use.

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 description coverage is only 43%, and the description does not compensate. It doesn't clarify the meaning of active, canvas_width, canvas_height, or display_count, leaving those parameters under-documented.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('Scalable Display TOP scaffold'), and adds key contents ('display tile maps, status, and calibration setup notes'). This distinguishes it from many sibling create_* tools, though it doesn't explicitly name an alternative.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies a use case (creating a Scalable Display scaffold) but lacks prerequisites, exclusions, or comparisons to similar display-related tools.

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

Deploy Server