Skip to main content
Glama

mcp_opendaw_create_konokol

Generate Indian Carnatic konokol (solkattu) vocal percussion as MIDI. Choose tala style, tempo, and cycles to create rhythmic patterns on a track.

Instructions

Create Indian Carnatic konokol (solkattu) — vocal percussion as MIDI.

Konokol (also spelled konnakkol) is the South Indian art of vocal percussion. Syllables represent rhythmic patterns: ta, ka, di, mi, thom, nam, ghu, dhi, khatam. Each syllable maps to a specific drum sound. This is the rhythmic foundation of all Carnatic music.

Styles (tala structures):

  • adi_tala: 8-beat cycle (most common). Structure: 4+2+2. Syllables: ta-ka-dhi-mi ta-ka-dhi-mi ta-ka-ta-ka. The foundational tala of Carnatic music.

  • roopaka_tala: 6-beat cycle (3/4). Structure: 3+3. Syllables: ta-ka-dhi ta-ka-dhi-mi. Used in lighter compositions, varnams.

  • khanda_chapu: 5-beat cycle. Structure: 2+3. Syllables: ta-ka ta-ka-ta. Asymmetric, flowing feel. Common in kritis.

  • mishra_chapu: 7-beat cycle. Structure: 3+2+2. Syllables: ta-ki-ta ta-ka ta-ka. Lyrical, song-like rhythm. Used in padams.

  • triputa_tala: 7-beat cycle (3+2+2 variant). Syllables: ta-ka-dhi-mi ta-ka ta. Alternative 7-beat structure.

  • jhampa_tala: 10-beat cycle. Structure: 4+2+4. Syllables: ta-ka-dhi-mi ta-ka ta-ka-dhi-mi. Used in javalis and tillanas.

GM percussion mapping (Indian fusion approach): 36 (kick) → thom, ghu (bass drum — low/open tones) 38 (snare) → nam, dhi (sharp, crisp) 42 (closed hat) → ta, ka (high, crisp) 43 (high floor tom) → mi (mid) 45 (low tom) → khatam (rolled)

Creates konokol notes on track_index. Includes syllable text in the result for reference.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
styleNoadi_tala
cyclesNo
velocityNo
tempo_bpmNo
start_beatNo
unit_indexNo
track_indexNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It discloses that MIDI notes are created with GM percussion mapping and syllable text in the result. However, it does not specify whether notes overwrite or merge, track creation behavior, or limitations. Some gaps remain.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is long (30+ lines) and includes extensive cultural context and tala details. While the first sentence clearly states the purpose, the following details could be more concise. The GM percussion mapping is useful, but some content may be extraneous for an AI agent.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given 7 parameters with no schema descriptions and no annotations, the description covers the concept and style options well but lacks explanation for most parameters and does not describe return value details (though output schema exists). It also does not clarify if notes are added to existing clips or overwrite. Completeness is adequate but has clear gaps.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The input schema has 7 parameters with 0% description coverage, so the description must provide meaning. It extensively explains the `style` parameter with 6 tala options and briefly mentions `track_index`. However, the other 5 parameters (cycles, velocity, tempo_bpm, start_beat, unit_index) receive no explanation, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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 Indian Carnatic konokol as MIDI, specifies the verb 'create', the resource 'konokol', and output format 'MIDI'. It distinguishes this tool from others by focusing on a specific rhythmic tradition, with extensive detail on tala structures.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explains that the tool creates konokol notes on a specified track and details the style options and GM mapping. However, it does not explicitly compare with alternatives like `mcp_opendaw_create_tala` or provide guidance on when to choose this over other rhythm creation tools. Usage context is implied but not explicitly stated.

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