Skip to main content
Glama
newsbubbles

ismail: agent DAW (MCP server)

Stage Music

stage_music

Play, stop, or set the volume of a single audio source in a scene, including positional playback from a point in the room and starting at a chosen time.

Instructions

Play one audio file from a place in the room, positional (louder as the person walks up), or stop it, or set its volume (page command: music). action: play | stop | volume (any value other than stop or volume plays). at is an object to play from (its position, lifted by lift metres; none: the room origin). One music source at a time: play replaces it. volume with nothing playing falls through to play and needs url. start: begin this many seconds into the song. The song's time as heard is in the page state (music: {playing, url, t, duration, loop}) and from stage_music_time; takes can play on it (stage_actor_play at_music). Page replies {playing, at, seconds, from} | {stopped: true} | {volume}. Emits: music_start {url, from, seconds, at}, music_stop {url, at_s}.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
atNo
refNo
urlNo
liftNo
loopNo
sceneYes
startNo
actionNoplay
volumeNo
rolloffNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.4.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and discloses important behavior: positional playback, lift, single-source replacement, volume fallback to play requiring `url`, page state shape, and emitted events. It does not cover permissions or error responses, but it is substantially more informative than the schema alone.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The first sentence is front-loaded with the core purpose, and the compact style avoids empty prose. However, it is a dense run-on paragraph with parentheticals and pipe-delimited alternatives that is harder to parse than necessary.

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 complex 10-parameter tool with no annotations and zero schema description coverage, the description leaves important call details missing, most notably the required `scene` parameter and several optional parameters. The output schema may cover returns, but the description is not complete enough to ensure correct invocation.

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 coverage is 0% for 10 parameters, and the description explains only some of them: `action`, `at`, `lift`, `start`, `volume`, and the `url` requirement during volume fallback. It omits the required `scene` parameter and the meanings of `loop`, `ref`, and `rolloff`; it also describes `at` as an object while the schema types it as a string.

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 states specific verbs and resources: play one audio file positionally, stop it, or set volume via the `music` page command. It also distinguishes the tool from `stage_music_time` and `stage_actor_play at_music`, though it does not contrast with other playback siblings such as `play_file` or `audio_place`.

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?

Usage is implied through the `action` values and the note that only one music source exists, so play replaces it. It references related tools for time and takes, but it gives no explicit when-not guidance or criteria for choosing this tool over other audio playback tools.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools