get_trackUse this when an agent needs to get one public track by blob identifier or title. Do not infer ownership, licensing, or unpublished availability.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate a safe read operation, and the description adds meaningful behavioral constraints: only public tracks are retrievable, and the agent must not infer ownership, licensing, or unpublished availability from the result. No contradiction with annotations.
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, no filler, and the primary usage is front-loaded immediately. The caveat about ownership/licensing/unpublished availability earns its place as a necessary behavioral warning.
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?
For a one-parameter read-only tool with an output schema and clear annotations, the description covers what the tool does, how to invoke it, and the key limitation around public availability. No critical information is missing.
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?
The schema gives no description for the single `id` parameter (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. 'By blob identifier or title' clarifies that `id` can be either a blob identifier or a track title, adding real semantic value beyond the raw schema.
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?
The description states a specific action ('get one public track') with clear scope and lookup criteria ('by blob identifier or title'). It naturally differentiates from sibling tools that operate on releases, compositions, sheet music, or scales.
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?
It explicitly says when to use the tool: whenever an agent needs a single public track by blob identifier or title. It does not name alternative sibling tools or give explicit when-not-to-use guidance, so it stops short of a full 5.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct resource or action: the four cyclic-scale tools cleanly separate generation, analysis, MusicXML export, and frequency calculation, while the catalog tools distinguish search, list, composition, release, track, and sheet-music lookup. There are no overlapping responsibilities that would cause an agent to misselect.
All tool names follow a consistent lowercase verb_noun snake_case pattern with clear verbs such as analyze, calculate, export, generate, get, list, and search. The singular/plural usage is logical and predictable throughout the toolset.
Ten tools is well within the ideal range and appropriately covers two cohesive subdomains: public music catalog access and cyclic-scale utilities. Each tool has a distinct purpose, and none feel redundant or merely decorative.
The catalog surface covers search, listing releases, and fetching compositions, releases, tracks, and sheet-music resources, while the cyclic-scale tools form a coherent generate-analyze-export workflow. Minor gaps exist, such as no explicit way to list tracks for a specific release or browse compositions independently of search, but agents can work around these with the existing tools.