FASTMEAN MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

fastmean_harmonics

Extract up to seven harmonics from a signal via native tre/tim/tmag/tph expressions evaluated by FASTMEAN, using Hz frequencies and a start/end window in seconds.

Instructions

Extract up to seven harmonics using native tre/tim/tmag/tph expressions.

Frequencies are Hz; window=[start,end] seconds. FASTMEAN itself evaluates the harmonic expressions. This differs from the NumPy spectrum tool.

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": {
      "path": "<path>",
      "signal": "<signal>",
      "frequencies": "<frequencies>",
      "window": "<window>"
    },
    "name": "fastmean_harmonics"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`eps`	No
`path`	Yes
`step`	No
`stop`	No
`signal`	Yes
`window`	Yes
`timeout`	No
`overrides`	No
`definitions`	No
`frequencies`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.6.0Oct 29, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Adds genuine context beyond the annotations: units (Hz, seconds), the two- to seven-harmonic cap, and the fact that FASTMEAN evaluates the expressions rather than a Python/NumPy path. However, it does not explain why the tool is annotated readOnlyHint=false and non-idempotent (does it run a simulation, write files, allocate a run?), nor anything about the timeout or overrides behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and the native-expression mechanism. Slight wasted space in the trailing 'This differs from...' sentence, which could be folded into a routing clause.

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?

With 10 parameters, no output schema, and no parameter documentation in either schema or description, an agent cannot reliably construct a call. Critical unknowns remain: form of 'path' and 'signal', what 'overrides'/'definitions' accept, and how eps/step/stop affect extraction accuracy.

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 0% across 10 parameters, yet the description only clarifies two of them: 'frequencies' is in Hz and 'window' is [start, end] in seconds. Nothing describes path, signal, eps, step, stop, timeout, overrides, or definitions — the tolerance/stepping parameters are especially opaque without documentation.

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?

States a concrete verb and resource ('Extract up to seven harmonics') and names the expression types (tre/tim/tmag/tph) it consumes. It also distinguishes itself from the NumPy-based sibling by name ('This differs from the NumPy spectrum tool'), so an agent can separate it from fastmean_spectrum.

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?

It contrasts itself with the NumPy spectrum tool but only says they 'differ' — it never states which one to choose, or under what conditions native expressions are preferred. No exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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