flstudio-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Apply an EQ mixing intent

fl_apply_eq_intent

Apply musical EQ moves like remove mud, add air, or high pass on a Fruity Parametric EQ 2. Groups all parameters in one undo-able action.

Instructions

Apply a musical EQ move on a Fruity Parametric EQ 2 using a free band. Sets type/freq/gain/width as one undo-able group; returns the band used and FL's readback strings. Revert with fl_rollback_last_change.

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": {
      "track": "<track>",
      "slot": "<slot>",
      "intent": "<intent>"
    },
    "name": "fl_apply_eq_intent"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`track`	Yes	Mixer track index.
`slot`	Yes	Effect slot of a Fruity Parametric EQ 2.
`intent`	Yes	Which EQ move to apply.
`intensity`	No	0..1; scales gain (gain=max*intensity). Default 0.5.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0May 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Describes that it applies a move (modifying state), is undo-able, and returns band and readback strings. Annotations indicate non-read-only and non-destructive, which aligns. Adds context beyond annotations about revertibility.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then behavioral details. No wasted words; every sentence adds essential information.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema and clear parameter descriptions, the tool's behavior is fully explained, including undo capability and return value hints. Complete for its complexity.

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 100% with clear descriptions. The description adds value by explaining that the intent sets type/freq/gain/width as a group and that intensity scales gain, going beyond schema alone.

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?

Clearly states the tool applies a musical EQ move on a specific plugin (Fruity Parametric EQ 2) using a free band, distinguishing it from other intent tools. The description is specific about the verb 'apply' and resource, and mentions it sets parameters as an undo-able group.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly suggests reverting with fl_rollback_last_change, providing usage guidance. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternatives like fl_plugin_set_param, but the intent-based context among siblings is clear.

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

Deploy Server