This is neat but I don't think this approach would work. :)
The "tool" would have to read/write tab-delimited sequence files so you'd likely have to write that, and the last step just restores the original fastq record, correct? If that is the case then you would just be undoing the work in the "tool" part of the pipeline. I could be misunderstanding the last part though, so apologies if I'm not correct.