Skip to main content
Glama
newsbubbles

ismail: agent DAW (MCP server)

Track Freeze

track_freeze

Renders multiple tracks into one playable audio clip for live decks, preserving effects, fader, pan, and automation; use it when too many tracks or placed audio cannot be played live.

Instructions

Render some tracks into one audio track a live deck can play: their mix as the studio renders it (notes, placed audio, each track's effects, fader, pan and automation), without the buses they send to or play through and without the master chain. Reach for it when a deck has too many tracks to render live, or when a part is placed audio (a live deck plays audio tracks, not audio placed on a track with notes). The new track into holds one clip of sounds/frozen_.wav: bar a at 0 s of the file, the song's tempo, its tail at the end. A send every frozen track makes at the same level comes over as the frozen track's send, and a bus they all play through becomes its output; the reply names what did not. bars=[a, b]: only those bars (a deck section); default the whole song. originals: 'mute' (default; the song then sounds as before, with the parts played from the frozen file) or 'keep'. Freezing into a frozen track again replaces it: its audio, and the tracks the last freeze muted come back on unless frozen again; its own fader, pan and effects stay. wait: stand in line this long when the machine is busy (as render).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
barsNo
intoNofrozen
waitNo10m
tracksYes
projectYes
originalsNomute

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.4.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Since no annotations were provided, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It goes deep, explaining complex behaviors such as how sends and buses are merged, how 'freezing into a frozen track again' behaves, and the specific function of the 'mute' vs. 'keep' originals setting.

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 description is excessively long and densely packed with technical jargon, which severely impacts quick comprehension and readability. While the information is necessary due to the tool's complexity, its structure is rambling rather than concise.

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?

The description is overwhelmingly complete. Given the high complexity of rendering mixes, effects, and automations, this level of technical detail—including default behaviors (like the 10m wait time) and operational constraints—leaves the agent with virtually no ambiguity about how the tool functions.

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

Parameters5/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage, the description provides critical semantic value. It defines the roles of key parameters like 'into' (name of the output track), 'bars' (defining the specific section of the song), and 'originals' (determining whether the source tracks are muted during the freeze).

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 defines the tool's purpose precisely: to render multiple studio tracks into a single, playable audio track for a live deck. It explicitly states the output consists of the mix, notes, effects, faders, and automation, ensuring clear differentiation from simple track copying or general audio rendering.

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?

It provides clear 'when' and 'why' scenarios for usage. It advises the agent to use the tool when the live deck has too many tracks to handle or when processing placed audio clips, which serves as an excellent usage guideline against other rendering/cleanup 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