ismail: agent DAW (MCP server)

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Instrument Fit

instrument_fit

Fit instrument parameters to a target sound's spectrum, envelope, and width so drums or bass match a reference hit, then save or apply the result.

Instructions

Search instrument parameters so its sound matches a target (spectrum + envelope + width; a band more than 20 dB off costs extra and the reply warns of it). target: a source like 'sound:refsnare' (cut one first with sound_import); instrument: dict, 'preset:x' or 'track:' (start from that track's instrument); params: {"path": [lo, hi]} e.g. {"tone_hz": [100, 250], "filter.cutoff": [300, 8000], "oscs.0.detune": [0, 40]}; notes: what to play (beats at project tempo; use the target's pitch); fmin/fmax restrict the spectral match to a range (e.g. ignore kick bleed below 70 Hz). Saves the result as sound save_as and/or sets it on apply_to_track. wait: when the machine is busy, stand in line this long ('10m' default, '0' refuses at once), as render does. Reach for it when a drum or a sound must have the genre's or the reference's character (a snare, kick or bass that sounds dated or generic): fit it to a hit from analyze_kit's components or sound_extract.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`fx`	No
`fmax`	No
`fmin`	No
`seed`	No
`wait`	No	10m
`iters`	No
`notes`	No	0 C4 1
`params`	Yes
`target`	Yes
`project`	Yes
`save_as`	No
`instrument`	Yes
`length_sec`	No
`target_window`	No
`apply_to_track`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.4.0Oct 26, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / wait
```
Added value: +{
+  "default": "10m",
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
First observedv0.3.0Oct 3, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses useful traits: the spectral/envelope/width objective, extra cost when a band is more than 20 dB off, warning behavior, busy-machine waiting, and that it can save or apply the result. It does not clarify overwrite/reversibility, permission requirements, or what happens to existing saved sounds or track instruments.

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?

The purpose and key constraints are front-loaded, and most sentences add useful operational detail. It is dense and run-on in places, but the length is defensible for a complex 15-parameter tool and there is little pure filler.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description covers the core workflow: finding a target, choosing an instrument, bounding parameters, specifying notes, waiting when busy, and saving/applying the result. Given the tool's complexity and 0% schema coverage, the undocumented optional parameters and missing side-effect details leave gaps, though the output schema reduces the need to explain return values.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the most important parameters well: target source formats, instrument formats, params ranges, notes, fmin/fmax, wait, save_as, and apply_to_track. However, it leaves fx, seed, iters, length_sec, and target_window undocumented, which is a meaningful gap for a 15-parameter tool.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: search instrument parameters so the resulting sound matches a target. It also names the match dimensions (spectrum, envelope, width) and the outcome warning, so an agent can distinguish this optimization tool from simple instrument setters.

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?

It explicitly says when to reach for it: when a drum or sound must carry a genre or reference character, especially dated/generic snares, kicks, or bass. It names source workflows such as analyze_kit, sound_extract, and sound_import, but does not exclude or compare against other fitting/match tools like track_fit or eq_match.

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

Deploy Server