@jam-jam/convert-mcp

Get an audio analysis job

jj_queue_get_job

Fetches one audio queue job by id so you can check its status, stage, per-step progress and rank. Use it to track analysis, alignment or conversion jobs and confirm completion.

Instructions

Fetches one job of the caller's audio queue by id (GET /queue/{id}): status (queued, active, done, failed, cancelled), stage (analyze, align), per-step status, progress and rank. An unknown id and a job of another account answer the same 404. Needs the queue:read scope. Costs no quota.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "jj_queue_get_job"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Job id returned by jj_audio_analyze or jj_queue_list.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.2Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden and does so: it discloses the status enumeration, the stage values, required queue:read scope, quota cost, and the security-relevant fact that an unknown id and another account's job return an identical 404. It also effectively describes the returned fields in place of the absent output schema.

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?

A single tight sentence front-loads the action and resource, then packs endpoint, return fields, error semantics, auth and cost without filler. Slightly dense but every clause earns its place.

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?

For a one-parameter read tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers purpose, scope, return shape, error behavior, permissions and cost — everything an agent needs to select and invoke it correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the single id parameter is already documented as coming from jj_audio_analyze or jj_queue_list. The description adds only the ownership scoping dimension ("the caller's audio queue"), which is useful but not format or validation detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: "Fetches one job of the caller's audio queue by id", and enumerates what comes back (status, stage, per-step status, progress, rank). That clearly separates it from jj_queue_list and jj_queue_cancel_job, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate itself from lookalike siblings such as jj_get_job or jj_ai_music_get_job.

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?

The scope ("the caller's audio queue", "by id") implies when to use this rather than listing the queue, and the parenthetical endpoint helps orient an agent. But there's no explicit when-to-use/when-not or named alternative, leaving the comparison to jj_queue_list or the other job-fetching tools to inference.

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