Skip to main content
Glama

mcp_opendaw_create_disco_arrangement

Creates a four-track 70s disco arrangement with four-on-floor drums, syncopated octave bass, sustained string pads, and wah-wah guitar using a I-vi-IV-V progression.

Instructions

Create a full disco arrangement — four-on-floor + octave bass + string sustains + wah guitar across 4 tracks.

Classic 70s disco with the signature groove — fundamentally different from house (its descendant):

  • Track 0: Drums — four-on-floor with 16th OPEN hats (not closed 8ths like house). Kick on every quarter, clap on 2 & 4. The 16th-note open hi-hat pattern is the disco signature — busier and more open than house's closed 8th hats. The groove that launched dance music.

  • Track 1: Bass — SYNCOPATED OCTAVE bass: the "good times" bass line. Root on beat 1, then syncopated octave jumps on the "and" of beats 2 and 4. Not off-beat 8ths like house, not arpeggiated like synthwave — it's a melodic bass line with octave leaps. The bass IS the hook in disco.

  • Track 2: Strings — sustained chord pads with octave doubling. Full bar sustain, lush and smooth. The orchestral element that separates disco from house — house uses stabs, disco uses sustained strings. Minor or major triad depending on chord.

  • Track 3: Guitar — wah-wah chops: 16th-note rhythmic scratching with accent pattern. Root + minor seventh voicing (funk-influenced). The "chukka-chukka" that drives the groove. Different from reggae skank (off-beat only) — disco guitar plays ALL 16ths with accents.

Uses I-vi-IV-V progression (G-Em-C-D in G major) — the classic disco four-chord loop. Different from house (minor vamp), pop (I-V-vi-IV), rock (I-IV-V). Disco's progression is major-key and optimistic — the "feel good" sound of the 70s.

At 120 BPM (default), this creates the classic disco groove — the tempo that defined the genre. The syncopated octave bass and 16th open hats are the fundamental differences from all 13 other arrangements: house has off-beat bass stabs with closed 8th hats, disco has melodic octave bass with 16th open hats.

bpm: Tempo (110-130, default 120 = classic disco). bars: Arrangement length (4-16, default 8). Must be multiple of 4. root: Root note (G is a classic disco key — G major). octave: MIDI octave for bass (2 = G2=43, standard disco bass register). unit_index: AU index with note tracks. drum_track / bass_track / string_track / guitar_track: Track indices.

Returns notes created per track and total.

Example: create_disco_arrangement(bpm=120, root="G", bars=8) create_disco_arrangement(bpm=115, root="C", bars=16)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bpmNo
barsNo
rootNoG
octaveNo
velocityNo
bass_trackNo
drum_trackNo
start_beatNo
unit_indexNo
guitar_trackNo
string_trackNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It exhaustively explains the generated output: tracks, rhythmic patterns, chord progression, tempo, and expected note densities. It also mentions the return format (notes created per track and total).

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 long but well-structured with headers and bullet points. It is informative and avoids fluff, though some repetition (e.g., tempo reference appears twice) could be trimmed.

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 complexity (11 parameters, no annotations), the description is remarkably thorough. It covers the arrangement's musical content, parameter roles, and output format. The existence of an output schema further supports completeness.

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

Parameters3/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates for many parameters (bpm, bars, root, octave, track indices) but leaves out velocity, start_beat, and unit_index. Partial coverage prevents a higher score.

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 the tool creates a full disco arrangement with four specific tracks, chord progression, and tempo. It distinguishes itself from other arrangement tools by detailing unique disco characteristics and contrasting with house and other genres.

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 implicitly guides usage by detailing when to create a disco arrangement versus house or other styles, with explicit comparisons. However, it lacks a succinct statement like 'Use this tool to generate a classic 70s disco arrangement.'

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