q-sys-mcp

Recall a snapshot

qsys_load_snapshot

Restore system settings from a saved snapshot by specifying bank and number, with an optional ramp time for gradual transition.

Instructions

Recall control settings from a saved snapshot bank/number, optionally ramped over seconds (Snapshot.Load). This MUTATES the running/emulated system.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "bank": "<bank>",
      "number": "<number>"
    },
    "name": "qsys_load_snapshot"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`bank`	Yes	Snapshot bank name, as named in Q-SYS Designer
`ramp`	No	Ramp time in seconds (optional)
`number`	Yes	Snapshot number within the bank (1-based)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.2.0Jul 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions mutation ('This MUTATES the running/emulated system'), but lacks details on side effects, permissions required, or behavior under error conditions (e.g., invalid bank/number).

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description consists of two concise sentences with no extraneous information. Essential details are front-loaded, and every word adds value.

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?

Given the tool has three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is adequate but not thorough. It explains the core function and mutation behavior, but omits details like return values, error handling, or the effect on the current system state beyond mutation.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage for parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra meaning: it notes ramp is optional and timed in seconds, which matches the schema. No additional context for bank or number beyond the schema descriptions.

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 clearly specifies the action ('Recall control settings') and the resource ('saved snapshot bank/number'), with optional ramp. It distinguishes from the sibling 'qsys_save_snapshot' by mentioning this is a load operation.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives. While it notes the tool mutates the system, it does not compare to other mutation tools like qsys_set_control or provide criteria for when to recall a snapshot instead of direct control changes.

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

Deploy Server