CutClip.one

music.generate

Generate a music track with Google Lyria (the model behind Flow Music) for a music/ambience placeholder, sized to the clip. Costs credits per track, charged to the project owner. Runs in the background — poll generation.list with placeholderId. The finished track fills the clip (undoable).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "projectId": "<projectId>",
      "placeholderId": "<placeholderId>"
    },
    "name": "music.generate"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`model`	No	lyria-3-clip (30 s) or lyria-3.5 (full song); defaults by the clip's length
`lyrics`	No	Words to sing, with optional [Verse]/[Chorus] tags. Ignored when instrumental
`prompt`	No	Genre, mood, instruments, tempo. Defaults to the clip's prompt, then the scene's music prompt
`projectId`	Yes
`instrumental`	No
`placeholderId`	Yes	A music or ambience placeholder on an audio track (timeline.add_placeholder; scenario.apply_to_timeline makes a "Score" one)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the whole burden and does so well: it discloses credit cost charged to the project owner, asynchronous background execution with the exact polling call, and that the resulting track fills the clip and is undoable. It omits failure/retry behavior, whether the placeholder must be empty, and any permission requirements.

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?

Four tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and target, then cost, then async behavior, then the effect. The parenthetical '(the model behind Flow Music)' is the only marketing-flavored filler, but it is short and aids identification.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 6-parameter mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the critical unknowns: cost, async completion path, and reversibility. Remaining gaps (failure handling, whether credits can be checked via credits.get_balance beforehand) are modest.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 67%, and the description usefully reinforces the parameter constraints: the target must be a music/ambience placeholder and the output is sized to the clip, which explains how model defaults are chosen. It adds little on lyrics/instrumental beyond the schema, but meaningfully clarifies placeholder semantics and defaults.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (generate a music track), names the underlying model, and scopes the target precisely to a music/ambience placeholder sized to the clip. That distinguishes it from siblings like voice.generate, music.compile_prompt, and render.* without needing their schemas.

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?

Makes clear this is for filling a music/ambience placeholder on a clip, and explicitly tells the agent the follow-up action: poll generation.list with placeholderId. It does not name an explicit exclusion (e.g., use voice.generate for speech, music.compile_prompt to iterate on the prompt first), so it falls short of a full when/when-not treatment.

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

All CutClip.one tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.