Skip to main content
Glama

Search Patch Techniques

search_techniques
Read-onlyIdempotent

Return canonical synthesis / patching techniques with role-keyed module realizations drawn from the corpus.

Use this when the user asks "how do I do X?" with X being a recognisable technique (low-pass-gate plucks, pinged-filter percussion, parallel multiband processing, complex-oscillator FM, karplus-strong pluck, clocked-delay feedback, modal-resonator excitation, wavefolder harmonics, envelope-follower ducking, Maths-style function-generator omnibus). It's also the right tool when the user has a module and asks "what's this good for?" — pass filter.module_id to retrieve every technique that references the module via its role_realizations.

Each technique declares role_definitions (the roles the technique uses, each with required and optional affordances) and role_realizations (concrete modules that fill each role, with the affordances they provide). The model substitutes modules from the user's rack into roles by affordance match — DO NOT treat the realization list as exhaustive or as a recipe.

Args:

  • filter (optional): { capability?, module_id?, text? }

    • capability: kebab-case capability id (see search_modules _meta.taxonomy). Returns techniques whose required or optional capability list includes this id.

    • module_id: "/". Returns techniques that have a role_realization referencing this module.

    • text: free-text phrase. Substring-matches against technique id/label/description AND a curated alias table (technique_aliases) — that's the right surface when a user types evocative prose like "stuttering delay", "plucked string", "source of uncertainty" that doesn't grep against any kebab-case id. Two-way alias match: long alias ("source of uncertainty") matches short query ("uncertainty"), and vice versa.

    • When multiple filters supplied, AND-intersects.

    • Omit filter entirely to list all techniques.

Returns: { "techniques": [ { "id": "low-pass-gate-pluck", "label": "Low-Pass Gate Pluck", "description": "Send a short envelope...", "required_capabilities": ["lowpass-gate"], "optional_capabilities": ["envelope-generator", "function-generator"], "role_definitions": [ { "role_id": "lpg", "description": "The vactrol-based or vactrol-emulating element. Strictly required...", "required_affordances": ["lowpass-gate"], "optional_affordances": [] }, ... ], "role_realizations": [ { "role_id": "lpg", "module_id": "make-noise/optomix", "affordances_provided": ["lowpass-gate"], "notes": "Two-channel vactrol-based LPG..." }, ... ], "canonical_instance": { "rationale": "...", "lineage": [ { "position": 1, "label": "Buchla 292 (1970)", "module_id": null, "notes": "..." }, { "position": 2, "label": "Tiptop Audio Buchla 292t", "module_id": "tiptop-audio/buchla-292t" }, ... ] }, "counter_canonical_notes": [ { "claim_pushed_back_against": "Optomix is the canonical pairing with Plaits...", "evidence": "The corpus catalogs 19 LPG-capable modules..." } ], "coverage": [ { "role_id": "voice", "realizations_count": 3 }, { "role_id": "lpg", "realizations_count": 19 }, { "role_id": "env", "realizations_count": 6 }, { "role_id": "clock", "realizations_count": 2 } ] } ], "_meta": { "filter": {...}, "feedback_hint"?: string } }

How to use role data:

  • role_realizations are CURATORIAL SAMPLES, not exhaustive lists. The coverage[].realizations_count tells you how many are documented; other modules may fill the same role.

  • To find modules in the user's rack that can fill a role, use find_role_realizations(technique_id, role_id, available_modules).

  • canonical_instance is opt-in and sparse. Most techniques don't have one; that absence is information. When present, it documents a documented historical lineage (e.g., Buchla 292 → 292t → MMG → Optomix for low-pass-gate-pluck) — NOT a prescription.

  • counter_canonical_notes push back on likely training-data priors. When the user invokes a canonical-sounding claim that has a counter_canonical_note, surface the pushback.

Errors:

  • "Module not found: " if filter.module_id is supplied and unknown.

  • Empty techniques[] with a feedback_hint when filters produce no matches — call report_gap if the user expected coverage.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filterNo

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds substantial behavioral context beyond the annotations: role_realizations are 'CURATORIAL SAMPLES, not exhaustive lists', canonical_instance is opt-in and sparse, and text matching uses a curated alias table with two-way matching. It also discloses error behavior (module not found, empty techniques with feedback_hint). No contradiction with readOnlyHint/idempotentHint.

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 long but well-structured with clear sections (usage, args, returns, role data guidance, errors). It is front-loaded with the purpose and use cases, and every sentence provides necessary operational detail. No filler.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description includes a full JSON return example, explains role data semantics, and documents error cases. It also gives cross-tool pointers, making it self-sufficient for an agent to correctly invoke and interpret the result.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden. It explains the filter object's three fields (capability, module_id, text) with formats, matching rules, AND-intersection behavior, and even gives example phrases for alias matching. This fully compensates for the schema gaps.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Return canonical synthesis / patching techniques with role-keyed module realizations' and immediately gives two explicit use cases ('how do I do X?' and 'what's this good for?'). It also distinguishes from siblings by cross-referencing find_role_realizations and report_gap.

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?

It explicitly states when to use the tool (user asks 'how do I do X?' or 'what's this good for?') and when to use alternatives (e.g., find_role_realizations for finding modules in the rack, report_gap for missing coverage). This exceeds the bar for clear context and exclusions.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource/action: get_module(s) for specs, search_modules for filtered queries, resolve_modules for name mapping, find_compatible_with for per-module relations, reachable_pairings/techniques for rack-level analysis. Minor overlap between get_module/get_modules and the relationship tools (find_compatible_with vs reachable_pairings) could cause misselection, but descriptions clarify scope.

Naming Consistency3/5

Mostly verb_noun snake_case (get_, search_, find_, resolve_, visualize_, report_, lookup_), but three tools break the pattern: rack_redundancy, reachable_pairings, reachable_techniques use noun/adjective phrases without a verb. The get_* cluster is consistent but the overall set mixes conventions.

Tool Count4/5

17 tools is slightly above the ideal 3-15 range but justified by the server's broad scope: module specs, search, manuals, relationships, rack analysis, visualization, and feedback. Each tool has a clear role; the count is reasonable for the domain's complexity.

Completeness5/5

The surface covers the full read-only Eurorack knowledge workflow: module lookup (get_module, search_modules, resolve_modules), manual prose (get_manual_chunk, search_manual), concepts (lookup_concept), techniques (search_techniques, find_role_realizations), compatibility (find_compatible_with, reachable_pairings), rack analysis (reachable_techniques, rack_redundancy), visualization, and provenance (get_source). report_gap even enables self-improvement. No obvious missing operations.

Resources