Skip to main content
Glama

setup_fx_chain

Batch add or configure FX across multiple tracks in one call, setting many plugin parameters at once with automatic crash-preventing order.

Instructions

Batch add and/or configure FX across any number of tracks in one call — this is the tool for both "add several plugins and set their params" AND "set many params on FX I already added," across multiple tracks/bands at once. Reach for this instead of chaining individual fx_add/fx_set_param/fx_set_param_by_name calls — setting up one FabFilter Pro-Q 3 EQ band properly (Used, Enabled, Frequency, Gain, Shape) is 4-5 separate single-param calls done that way; here it's one fx_chain entry.

Params are applied in a fixed, deterministic order (not raw dict iteration order) specifically because some plugins (confirmed: FabFilter Pro-Q 3/Pro-C 2) crash if a band's Used/Enabled flag isn't written before its other params — this already handles that, no need to sequence params yourself.

Example — add the same plugin (e.g. an EQ) to 5 different tracks in one call, instead of 5 separate fx_add calls:

[
    {"track_index": 0, "fx_chain": [{"name": "FabFilter Pro-Q 3"}]},
    {"track_index": 1, "fx_chain": [{"name": "FabFilter Pro-Q 3"}]},
    {"track_index": 2, "fx_chain": [{"name": "FabFilter Pro-Q 3"}]},
    {"track_index": 3, "fx_chain": [{"name": "FabFilter Pro-Q 3"}]},
    {"track_index": 4, "fx_chain": [{"name": "FabFilter Pro-Q 3"}]}
]

fx_chain can hold more than one plugin per track too — a whole Saturn + Pro-Q 3 + Pro-C 2 chain, with params, added to several tracks, is still one call.

Example — set up Band 1 (Low Cut) and Band 2 (High Shelf, +2dB) on an EQ that's already track 0's fx_index 1, by index (skips the fuzzy name-matching lookup, marginally faster for a big batch):

[{"track_index": 0, "fx_chain": [
    {"fx_index": 1, "params_by_index": {
        "0": 1.0, "1": 1.0, "2": 0.218, "8": 0.25
    }},
    {"fx_index": 1, "params_by_index": {
        "13": 1.0, "14": 1.0, "15": 0.845, "16": 0.533, "21": 0.375
    }}
]}]

(Same fx_index reused across entries is fine — each entry is an independent set of param writes, not a new FX add.)

Args: tracks: JSON array, one object per track: {"track_index": int, "fx_chain": [...]}. Each fx_chain entry is one FX to add-and/or-configure: - "name": str — add new via fuzzy match (default mode). "add_mode": "find_or_add" reuses an existing instance of that plugin instead of adding a duplicate; "add_mode": "find_only" fails if it's not already there. - "fx_index": int — target an FX that's already in the chain (from an earlier fx_add/setup_fx_chain call, or already present in the project) instead of adding one. - "params": {name: value} — set params by fuzzy name match (e.g. "Band 1 Frequency"). Values 0.0-1.0 normalized, same as fx_set_param. - "params_by_index": {"<index>": value} — same, by exact 0-based param index (keys are strings — JSON object keys always are). Skips the per-param name lookup. - "preset": str — load a preset by name after params are applied.

Every failure is reported per-item in the response's summary ({"error": "..."} on that track or that one param), never a hard abort of the whole batch — a bad track_index, an FX name that doesn't resolve, or a param name/index that doesn't match anything each fail on their own without losing whatever else in the same call succeeded. Check summary rather than assuming a non-throwing call means every item landed.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tracksYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Addedv0.6.0

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With zero annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and delivers richly: it discloses deterministic param-application order, the confirmed crash risk for specific plugins (FabFilter Pro-Q 3/Pro-C 2) if Used/Enabled isn't written first, per-item error isolation ('never a hard abort'), and the warning to check `summary` rather than assume a non-throwing call succeeded. This is exactly the kind of non-obvious runtime behavior an agent needs and cannot infer from 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?

The description is long (~450 words) and front-loaded well: purpose in sentence one, usage routing in sentence two, then behavioral details, two JSON examples, and a structured Args section. The two examples are valuable because they show non-obvious patterns (reusing the same fx_index across entries), but there is mild redundancy between the examples and the Args section; against 0% schema coverage the length is mostly earned.

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 highly nested tool with 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is remarkably complete: all modes, addressing strategies, ordering constraints, error semantics, and both primary usage patterns are covered. The only minor absence is a full success-response shape, but the `summary` contract is described well enough for an agent to call correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0% — the schema only declares `tracks` as a string — so the description fully compensates. It documents the JSON array structure (`{track_index, fx_chain}`), every entry mode (`name`, `add_mode`, `fx_index`, `params`, `params_by_index`, `preset`), value normalization (0.0-1.0), the string-keys caveat for JSON objects, and the semantics of each `add_mode`. The burden shift is total and the compensation is complete.

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 opening sentence states a specific verb+resource+scope: 'Batch add and/or configure FX across any number of tracks in one call.' It explicitly frames both use cases (add-with-params and configure-existing), and its place among FX siblings is unambiguous — it is the batching superset of fx_add/fx_set_param/fx_set_param_by_name, not a competing single-item operation.

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?

The description explicitly names the alternatives ('instead of chaining individual fx_add/fx_set_param/fx_set_param_by_name calls') and quantifies the condition: a single FabFilter Pro-Q 3 band takes 4-5 separate single-param calls, vs one fx_chain entry here. The 'Reach for this instead of...' phrasing gives the agent a direct routing rule with no inference needed.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/xDarkzx/Reaper-MCP'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server