ismail

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Live Load

live_load

Load a song onto a deck for live mixing or playback, with options to cue, loop, or play a section. It renders the mix, automation, and group buses at house tempo.

Instructions

Load an ismail song (its project folder: tracks, instruments, effects, buses, notes) onto a deck; every track starts on the same bar. bars=[a, b] takes a section. It plays at the house tempo (re-rendered, not time-stretched) and loops unless loop=False. Cued (off air) by default while another deck is on air: listen with live_listen(deck=...), then bring it in with live_transition. The song's mix comes over as rendered: its automation (effect params and volume as ramps, instrument params rendered with the notes, the master fade; repeated every pass on a looping deck) and its group buses (a reverb on a drum bus keeps the dry drums). Placed audio clips and the master effect chain do not (the reply lists what was left out). Loading replaces what a cued deck held.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`at`	No	next_bar
`cue`	No
`bars`	No
`deck`	Yes
`loop`	No
`song`	Yes
`project`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.0Oct 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so: it discloses tempo re-rendering (not time-stretching), looping behavior, that loading replaces the cued deck's contents, and precisely which mix elements survive (automation ramps, group buses) versus which are dropped (placed clips, master FX chain). The note that the reply lists omissions is valuable operational context.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then layered detail. The mix-fidelity parenthetical is long but each clause conveys a distinct behavior. Slightly dense semicolon splicing prevents a 5.

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 live-performance tool, the description covers operation, default state, follow-up tools, and fidelity trade-offs, and since an output schema exists it does not need to enumerate return fields (and even notes the reply lists omissions). Nothing essential to correct invocation is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It meaningfully documents bars (section slice), loop (default true), and cue (off-air default), and implies the next_bar default for 'at'. It leaves deck, song, and project entirely unexplained, which is a gap for a 7-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?

States a specific verb and resource: loads an ismail song (project folder with tracks, instruments, effects, buses, notes) onto a deck. It also implicitly distinguishes itself from live_transition and live_listen by describing the cue/air model those tools operate on.

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?

Explicitly describes the workflow: cued off-air by default, then listen with live_listen(deck=...), then bring in with live_transition. It also names the section mechanism (bars=[a,b]) and the loop=False escape hatch, so an agent knows the branches.

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

Deploy Server