Skip to main content
Glama

Make a sound effect or seamless loop from a recipe

r3_sound_create

Make a sound (a 48 kHz WAV in the account's audio files) from a recipe that R3 renders: layers of synth / fm / noise / sample sources, each with an envelope and effects (filter, distortion, bitcrush, delay, reverb, compressor, tremolo), and a master stage that can make a seamless LOOP. Nothing is uploaded and it is free (60 sounds an hour for each agent key or app connection).

Start from a preset (laser, coin, jump, explosion, click, whoosh, hit, power-up, helicopter-rotor, engine-hum) with optional overrides {seed, duration, channels}, or pass a full recipe: r3_docs_read("SOUND_RECIPES.md") has the format, every preset's recipe and worked examples. An invalid recipe is refused with the path of the problem.

You cannot hear it: the answer gives numbers (peak / RMS dBFS, clipping, silent tail, the loop seam check, warnings), the url an Audio component takes and a listen link for the user. Pass attachTo {projectId} to also add an Audio component playing it in that project (a loop loops and plays when the project runs; a one-shot is played from code). Names are unique per account.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesWhat the owner sees in their audio files, e.g. "Helicopter rotor". Unique in the account.
presetNoA preset: laser, coin, jump, explosion, click, whoosh, hit, power-up, helicopter-rotor, engine-hum.
recipeNoOr a full recipe (format "r3-sound-recipe", version 1).
attachToNoAlso add an Audio component playing it: {projectId, name?, volume?, playOnStart?}.
overridesNoWith a preset: {seed, duration, channels} (seed = another variation).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYes
loopYes
nameYes
statsYes
answerYesThis answer in words: what was done, what R3 measured, decided or refused, and what to do next. The same text as the result's text block. Read it: the fields beside it are the data, this is the guidance.
audioIdYes
attachedYes
seamlessYes
warningsYes
listenUrlYes
durationMsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already identify a non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive, open-world creation operation. The description adds important behavior beyond annotations: rate limit of 60 sounds/hour, no upload, invalid-recipe rejection with error path, returned audio metrics, listen link, and attachTo side effects.

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 dense and front-loads the core purpose, then adds relevant operational details. It is long, but the length is mostly justified by recipe, preset, output, and attachment complexity.

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 output schema and annotations cover return structure and safety, while the description fills remaining gaps: recipe documentation pointer, preset examples, overrides, validation behavior, rate limits, unique naming, and attachTo semantics. It is complete for this tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents parameters. The description still adds meaningful semantics: preset overrides like seed for variation, recipe format guidance via r3_docs_read, and loop-versus-one-shot behavior for attachTo.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: it makes a 48 kHz WAV in the account's audio files from a recipe, with presets or full recipes. The scope is clear, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools such as r3_sound_read or r3_sound_update.

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?

Explains the main usage modes: start from a preset with optional overrides, or pass a full recipe, and use attachTo to add an Audio component. It gives clear context but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or name alternatives for reading/updating sounds.

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.

Resources