PostFader V12 — FL Studio MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

piano_roll_setup

Prepare FL Studio's Piano Roll scripting for note tools: check status, write the Postfader Apply script, and confirm you ran it once.

Instructions

Prepare the one-time Piano Roll scripting setup that note tools need.

status reports readiness without writing files. prepare writes the
Postfader Apply script into FL's Piano Roll scripts folder; the user must
then run it once from FL's Piano Roll menu. confirm with
confirm_user_ran_script=true arms this MCP process. Writes no notes. Reuse
the setup for the rest of the session.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`action`	No	status reads readiness; prepare writes the script; confirm records that the user ran it.	status
`confirm_user_ran_script`	No	Required for action=confirm, after the user ran Postfader Apply once in FL.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`platform`	Yes
`shortcut`	Yes
`observed_at`	Yes
`script_path`	Yes
`script_exists`	Yes
`last_operation`	No
`schema_version`	No	1.0
`last_request_id`	No
`scripts_directory`	Yes
`setup_instruction`	Yes
`armed_this_session`	Yes
`last_requested_digest`	No
`prepared_this_session`	Yes
`last_requested_note_count`	No
`automatic_trigger_supported`	Yes
`authoritative_fl_note_readback_available`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv11.0.2Oct 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, and the description correctly frames this as a setup write that "Writes no notes." The description adds real context: what prepare actually writes, that confirm arms the process, and that status doesn't touch files. It stops short of covering error/failure paths, so a 4 rather than 5.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with purpose, then action-by-action behavior in compact prose. Slightly dense in the middle but every sentence contributes.

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 annotations already cover the safety profile and an output schema exists, the description supplies exactly the missing procedural context: prepare writes the script, the user must run it in FL, confirm arms the process, reuse for the session. An agent has everything needed to drive the setup correctly.

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%, so the schema carries the parameter details; baseline is 3. The description goes further by explaining the sequencing of the confirm action and why confirm_user_ran_script=true is needed, adding meaning beyond the field 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 names a specific resource (Piano Roll scripting setup) and distinguishes this one-time setup tool from the note-manipulation siblings (piano_roll_read_notes, piano_roll_write_notes, piano_roll_transform_notes) that depend on it. The three actions are explicitly described.

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 states when to use each action (status to check, prepare to write, confirm after the user runs the script), notes the user-run step required in FL, and says to reuse the setup for the session rather than repeat it. This is explicit when/when-not guidance.

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

Deploy Server