List, add, or remove the folders creaper searches for samples and loops, including Arturia, SILA, Music, and REAPER Media paths.
Lists, adds or removes the folders creaper searches for samples and loops (by default the ones it finds: Arturia's sample library, SILA's, Music, REAPER Media).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| add | No | A folder of samples to add, e.g. 'D:/Samples' | |
| remove | No | A folder to stop indexing |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.19.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully names the default folders (Arturia, SILA, Music, REAPER Media), but says nothing about whether add/remove persist to config, whether removal is reversible, whether ordering matters, or what the call returns. For a mutating config tool this is a real gap.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single front-loaded sentence with the action verbs first and the default-set detail relegated to a parenthetical. No wasted phrasing, though the parenthetical slightly crowds the sentence.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description should ideally cover the listing behavior, persistence semantics, and return shape. It covers the default state but leaves the add/remove side effects and the implicit list mode unexplained.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, with 'add' (e.g. 'D:/Samples') and 'remove' both documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond that, so the baseline 3 is correct.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Specific verbs (lists/adds/removes) applied to a clearly named resource (the sample/loop search folders creaper indexes). An agent can tell this is distinct from find_samples, which locates files rather than configuring search paths. It stops short of 5 only because the 'list' behavior has no corresponding parameter and is only implied.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description states the default folder set but gives no when-to-use guidance, no mention of the no-argument case that presumably lists, and no routing to or from alternatives like find_samples or place_loop. Usage is inferred at best.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.