windy-word-mcp

start_recording

Begin a voice recording in batch, streaming, or API mode. Returns immediately; poll recording state to confirm live state. Idempotent: does not restart if already recording.

Instructions

Begin a voice recording (mode-aware: batch / streaming / API engine). The actual mic-capture + WebSocket setup completes asynchronously after the call returns — poll get_recording_state to confirm the live state. Idempotent: if already recording, returns { ok: true, alreadyRecording: true } without firing a second start.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "start_recording"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.11.0Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Without annotations, the description bears full transparency burden. It discloses the async nature of the actual setup, idempotent behavior with return shape, and that the call returns immediately. However, it does not elaborate on mode-awareness or potential errors. Still adequate for a simple start tool.

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 is two sentences, no wasted words. It front-loads the primary action and then adds critical behavioral details (async, idempotent). Every sentence earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no input parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior: how to start, async follow-up, and idempotency. It does not detail return values beyond the idempotent case, but that is acceptable for a simple trigger tool with siblings for state checking.

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?

There are zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. The description implies no arguments are needed, which is clear. Baseline for no parameters is 4, and the description adds no misleading information.

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 starts with 'Begin a voice recording,' clearly stating the action and resource. It mentions mode-awareness and distinguishes itself from siblings like stop_recording and cancel_recording. The purpose is explicit and unambiguous.

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?

The description explains when to use the tool (to start a recording) and provides guidance on polling get_recording_state to confirm live state. It does not explicitly compare with siblings like toggle_recording, but the async and idempotency notes offer useful context. Some missing when-not-to-use information.

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

Deploy Server