Skip to main content
Glama

mcp_opendaw_copy_notes_to_track

Copy notes from a source region to a destination track, with optional transpose, time offset, and velocity scaling for MIDI layering and doubling.

Instructions

Copy notes from one track/region to another track — MIDI layering and doubling.

Copies all notes from a source region to a destination track's first region. Optional transpose (semitones), time offset (beats), and velocity scaling.

Use cases:

  • Layer drums: copy drum track to second track with different instrument

  • Create harmony: copy melody +12 (octave) or +7 (fifth)

  • Call-and-response: copy with time_offset to create echo

  • Doubles: copy to same track position with slight transpose for thickening

source_unit_index: Source AU index. source_track_index: Source note track index. dest_track_index: Destination note track index. source_region_index: Source region (-1 = first region). dest_unit_index: Destination AU index (-1 = same as source). transpose: Semitone offset (-127 to 127, 0 = same pitch). time_offset: Beat offset for copied notes (0 = same position, 2 = two beats later). velocity_scale: Multiply velocity of copied notes (1.0 = same, 0.7 = quieter layer).

Returns count of notes copied.

Example:

Layer drums — copy track 0 to track 2

copy_notes_to_track(0, 0, 2)

Create octave harmony — copy melody +12

copy_notes_to_track(0, 3, 4, transpose=12, velocity_scale=0.7)

Echo effect — copy 2 beats later at half velocity

copy_notes_to_track(0, 0, 1, time_offset=2, velocity_scale=0.5)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
transposeNo
time_offsetNo
velocity_scaleNo
dest_unit_indexNo
dest_track_indexYes
source_unit_indexYes
source_track_indexYes
source_region_indexNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral transparency. It states the tool copies notes from a source region to a destination track's first region, returns a count, and supports optional transformations. It does not mention whether the source is modified, permissions needed, or error handling, but the core behavior is clearly disclosed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured with a summary, bullet use cases, parameter definitions, return value, and examples. Every section adds value, and the most important information (purpose) is front-loaded. Despite length, it is efficient and not verbose.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (8 parameters, 3 required), the description covers all parameters, explains the return value, and provides multiple examples. It addresses potential use cases and parameter options, making it complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Despite the input schema having 0% description coverage, the tool's description provides a line for each parameter (e.g., 'source_unit_index: Source AU index'), adding meaningful explanation beyond the schema's type and defaults. This fully compensates for the schema gap.

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 'Copy notes from one track/region to another track', using a specific verb and resource. It further distinguishes the tool by mentioning 'MIDI layering and doubling' and provides concrete use cases (e.g., layer drums, create harmony), differentiating it from sibling tools that copy regions or entire tracks.

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 explicitly lists use cases (layer drums, harmony, call-and-response, doubles) and provides examples, giving clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or mention alternatives, though the use cases imply appropriate scenarios.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/AMEOBIUS-team/opendaw-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server