Skip to main content
Glama
wushiray

cakewalkmcp

by wushiray
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

cw_edit

Runs an editing command in Cakewalk SONAR and selects the target first, so commands like quantize, transpose, or normalize act on clips instead of doing nothing.

Instructions

Run an editing command: quantize | grooveQuantize | transpose | splitClips | splitAtNow | splitMidiNotes | mergeClips | gain | normalize | reverse | removeSilence | fadeEnvelope. Every one needs a selection, which this tool satisfies first — that precondition is the difference between "the command does nothing" and "it opens its dialog".

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
commandYes
confirmNoRequired for the destructive ones, e.g. confirm: 'normalize'
selectFirstNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It helpfully discloses that every command requires a selection and that auto-selection determines whether the command does nothing or opens its dialog. It does not disclose which commands are destructive, whether confirmation is required, or what state changes occur.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the verb and command list, and it avoids redundant padding. The selection sentence is slightly conversational but still earns its place by explaining non-obvious behavior.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a multi-command editing tool with destructive operations, no annotations, no output schema, and low schema description coverage, the description is under-specified. It omits destructive/confirm behavior and sibling routing, even though those are central to invoking it safely and 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 only 33%, so the description should compensate. It explains the selection prerequisite behind selectFirst and lists the command values, but it does not explain confirm or identify which commands require it, leaving a meaningful gap.

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?

The description gives a specific verb/resource ("Run an editing command") and enumerates the exact command set, so the tool's role is clear. However, it does not distinguish this dispatcher from nearby siblings such as cw_run_command, cw_quantize_dialog, or cw_transpose_plan.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

It provides a selection precondition, but gives no guidance on when to use cw_edit versus alternatives like cw_run_command or command-specific plan/dialog tools. There are no exclusions or routing rules beyond the selection note.

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