Skip to main content
Glama

mcp_opendaw_create_hemiola

Creates a hemiola rhythm pattern, such as 3:2 or 2:3, by superimposing primary and secondary note groups over a specified number of bars, resulting in a cross-rhythm illusion.

Instructions

Create a hemiola — 3:2 rhythmic displacement creating cross-rhythm illusion.

A hemiola superimposes a 3-note grouping over a 2-note grouping (or vice versa) within the same time span, creating the illusion of a different meter. The classic 3-against-2 pattern is fundamental to West African, Afro-Cuban, jazz, and minimalist music. Brahms, Bernstein, and Glass used it extensively.

The pattern string defines which beats get primary vs secondary emphasis: "3:2" — 3 primary notes in the time of 2 secondary (classic hemiola) "2:3" — 2 primary notes in the time of 3 secondary (inverse hemiola)

Creates notes on a single track: primary group uses primary_pitch, secondary group uses secondary_pitch. Both span the same total duration.

pattern: "3:2" (3 against 2) or "2:3" (2 against 3). bars: Total length in bars (1-4). Each bar = 4 beats. unit_index: AU index. track_index: Note track index. start_beat: Starting beat position. primary_pitch: MIDI pitch for primary group (default 60 = C4). secondary_pitch: MIDI pitch for secondary group (default 64 = E4). primary_velocity: Velocity for primary notes 0-1. secondary_velocity: Velocity for secondary notes 0-1. duration: Note duration in beats.

Returns total notes created and hemiola ratio.

Example: create_hemiola(pattern="3:2", bars=2, primary_pitch=60, secondary_pitch=67)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
barsNo
patternYes
durationNo
start_beatNo
unit_indexNo
track_indexNo
primary_pitchNo
secondary_pitchNo
primary_velocityNo
secondary_velocityNo

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. It explains that notes are created on a single track, both groups span the same total duration, and returns 'total notes created and hemiola ratio'. It does not disclose prerequisites, destructiveness, or undo capabilities, but the core behavior is transparent enough.

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: it starts with a clear purpose, then gives musical background, pattern explanation, parameter list, return info, and an example. It could be slightly more concise, but every sentence adds value.

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?

Given the complexity (10 parameters, 1 required, no output schema in structured data), the description adequately covers all parameters, explains the output, and includes an example. It is mostly complete, though it could specify whether the track must already exist or if the tool creates it.

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?

Schema coverage is 0% (no descriptions in input schema), so the description must compensate fully. It provides a comprehensive list of all 10 parameters with their meanings, default values, and range constraints (e.g., bars 1-4, velocity 0-1). This goes well beyond what the schema alone offers.

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 hemiola, a 3:2 rhythmic displacement, and provides a detailed explanation of the concept. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_polyrhythm by specifically naming the pattern types (3:2 and 2:3) and the musical context.

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 explains the musical purpose and provides pattern options (3:2 and 2:3), giving clear guidance on when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly tell when not to use it or compare with alternative tools like create_polyrhythm, which could have overlapping functionality.

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