Skip to main content
Glama
wave-av

WAVE MCP Server

Official
by wave-av
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

wave_mark_highlight

Mark a specific moment in a live stream to create a highlight for later clipping. Provide the stream ID, timestamp, and optional label to save the highlight.

Instructions

Mark a moment in a stream as a highlight for later clipping (POST /v1/streams/{id}/highlights)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
labelNoLabel for the highlight
stream_idYesThe stream ID
timestampNoISO 8601 timestamp of the highlight moment (default: now)
confidenceNoConfidence score (0-1, for AI-detected highlights)
duration_secondsNoDuration of the highlighted moment, in seconds

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.3.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / duration_seconds
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Duration of the highlighted moment, in seconds",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "number"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / stream_id / pattern
      Added value: +"^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[1-8][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[89abAB][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}|00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000|ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff)$"
    • addedInput schema / properties / timestamp
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "ISO 8601 timestamp of the highlight moment (default: now)",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.5

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 the full behavioral disclosure burden. It does reveal that this is a POST request and marks a highlight, but it does not mention side effects, reversibility, auth requirements, idempotency, whether multiple highlights per stream are allowed, or what the API returns. This is a meaningful transparency gap for a mutating 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 a single efficient sentence that states the action, resource, purpose, and endpoint with no filler or redundancy. All content is relevant and front-loaded, making it easy to scan.

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?

The input schema fully documents the parameters, and the description provides the core action and endpoint. However, with no output schema and no annotations, the description does not clarify expected return values, failure modes, or how this relates to the wave_create_clip workflow. It is adequate for basic invocation but leaves uncertainty around post-invocation behavior.

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?

All five parameters already have descriptive definitions in the input schema (100% coverage), including stream_id, timestamp, label, confidence, and duration_seconds. The description itself adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the endpoint path variable corresponding to stream_id, so the schema carries the load and a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific action ('Mark'), a specific resource ('a moment in a stream'), and a clear purpose ('as a highlight for later clipping'). It also includes the exact POST endpoint, which makes the tool's function unambiguous and distinguishes it from the sibling wave_create_clip by indicating this only marks for later clipping rather than creating a clip directly.

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 phrase 'for later clipping' implies this tool is used to save a marker before a clip is created, but there is no explicit statement of when to use it versus alternatives such as wave_create_clip. No exclusions, prerequisites, or direct references to sibling tools are provided.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools