open_scoreShow a finished score in its interactive panel, with its saved revision and review state. A score just made from notation already has its panel: do not open it again.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| notation | No | staff, jianpu (1 = the key, movable do), jianpu_fixed (1 = C, fixed do) or jianpu_melody (top line only). Saved as the score's display choice. | |
| score_id | Yes | The score, from a result or the score list. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / notation / anyOfRemoved value: -[
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
-]Input schema / properties / notation / defaultRemoved value: -nullInput schema / properties / notation / descriptionAdded value: +"staff, jianpu (1 = the key, movable do), jianpu_fixed (1 = C, fixed do) or jianpu_melody (top line only). Saved as the score's display choice."Input schema / properties / notation / typeAdded value: +"string"Input schema / properties / score_id / descriptionAdded value: +"The score, from a result or the score list."Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With annotations present the bar is lower, and the description does add useful context about what the panel exposes (revision and review state). However, it presents the tool as a passive "Show" while annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and the schema says notation is "Saved as the score's display choice" — the persistence side effect of opening is never disclosed. It also leaves "finished" undefined and says nothing about failure for non-finished scores.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, zero filler, with the core action front-loaded and the caveat trailing it. Every clause earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Adequate for a panel-opening tool with no output schema and fully documented params, but gaps remain: what "finished" means, what the panel returns or requires, and that opening persists the display notation. Against readOnlyHint=false these omissions matter.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so both score_id and notation (including all display variants) are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter meaning at all, so baseline 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a concrete verb and resource ("Show a finished score in its interactive panel") plus what the panel surfaces (saved revision, review state). It scopes to "finished" scores, which implicitly separates it from freshly created ones, but it doesn't differentiate itself from close siblings like get_score, read_score_panel or score_panel_state.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
"A score just made from notation already has its panel: do not open it again" is an explicit when-not-to-use rule, which is more than most definitions offer. It stops short of naming the right alternative (get_score / read_score_panel) for the excluded case, so the agent must infer it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.