FreqBlog Music Metadata

Build Setlist

build_setlist

Read-only

Order a crate of 2-100 catalog tracks into a beat-matched DJ set that follows an energy arc, keeping each consecutive transition harmonically and tempo-smooth. arc is one of peak_time (default — builds to a peak then eases), warmup, cooldown, or flat.

Returns the `arc`, `count`, an overall `flow_score` (0-100), the `tracks` in play order, the
per-step `transitions` ({from_index, to_index, score, reason}), and `omitted` (ids not found
in the catalog). Feed tracks[].itunes_track_id into a Rekordbox/Serato export to drop the set
straight into your DJ software. track_ids are catalog itunes_track_ids. Costs 5 quota units.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`arc`	No	Energy arc: 'peak_time' (default), 'warmup', 'cooldown', or 'flat'.	peak_time
`track_ids`	Yes	The crate to order — 2 to 100 catalog itunes_track_ids.
`start_track_id`	No	Optional fixed opener — must be one of track_ids.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description adds value beyond annotations: it reveals the tool returns data (not mutates), costs 5 quota units, and details the output structure. Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true; the description reinforces non-destructive behavior and adds cost and output specifics.

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 efficient at 4-5 sentences, starting with the main action and then detailing arc, output, usage, and cost. It is front-loaded with the core purpose. Slightly dense but no wasted words.

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?

The description is comprehensive: covers input limits (2-100 tracks), arc options, output structure (flow_score, transitions, omitted ids), and even a usage hint (feed into DJ software). Given the tool's complexity and the presence of an output schema, the description adds ample context and covers all key aspects.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description repeats schema info for 'arc' options and 'track_ids' meaning, but adds minimal extra context: start_track_id constraint 'must be one of track_ids'. No significant new meaning beyond schema definitions.

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 clearly states the tool's action: 'Order a crate of 2-100 catalog tracks into a beat-matched DJ set that follows an energy arc.' It specifies the resources (catalog tracks) and the output (setlist with transitions, score, etc.). This distinguishes it from siblings like suggest_next_track or score_transition, which focus on individual aspects.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description implies usage: when you have a crate of tracks and want a harmonically and tempo-smooth DJ set. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use it, but the context is clear and no sibling differentiation is provided. The mention of cost provides a constraint.

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

All FreqBlog Music Metadata tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: search, feature retrieval, set building, transition scoring, etc. There is no overlap or ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools use consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (e.g., find_tracks_by_key, get_audio_features, build_setlist). No style mixing.

Tool Count5/5

12 tools is well within the ideal range, covering search, features, discovery, and set building without bloat or deficiency.

Completeness4/5

Core metadata retrieval, search, harmonic mixing, and DJ set tools are all present. Minor gaps like user library management are outside the scope.

Resources

Need Help?