Skip to main content
Glama

mcp_opendaw_create_polyrhythm

Produces a polyrhythm by simultaneously playing two streams with different subdivision counts on a single track. Configure ratio, pitches, and velocity.

Instructions

Create a polyrhythm — two rhythmic streams with different subdivision counts playing simultaneously.

A polyrhythm divides the same time span into two different numbers of equal parts. The classic 3:4 means 3 notes in the time of 4 — creating cross-rhythms used in jazz, electronic, African, and progressive music.

Creates notes on a single track: primary stream uses primary_pitch, secondary uses secondary_pitch. Both streams span the same total duration (bars × 4 beats).

primary_count: Number of primary subdivisions (2-16). E.g., 3 in a 3:4 polyrhythm. secondary_count: Number of secondary subdivisions (2-16). E.g., 4 in a 3:4 polyrhythm. bars: Total length in bars (1-8). unit_index: AU index. track_index: Note track index. start_beat: Starting beat position. primary_pitch: MIDI pitch for primary stream (default 60 = C4). secondary_pitch: MIDI pitch for secondary stream (default 72 = C5, one octave up). 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 polyrhythm ratio.

Common polyrhythms: 3:4 — classic cross-rhythm (jazz, electronic) 2:3 — hemiola (African, Latin) 3:5 — complex polyrhythm (progressive) 4:5 — dense polyrhythm (modern jazz) 7:8 — extreme polyrhythm (math rock)

Example: create_polyrhythm(primary_count=3, secondary_count=4, bars=2, primary_pitch=60, secondary_pitch=67)

Input Schema

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

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. It explains that notes are created on a single track with two pitches and returns total notes and ratio. However, it does not disclose whether existing notes are overwritten, potential side effects, or required setup, leaving some gaps.

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 well-structured with a definition, concept, parameter list, common polyrhythms table, and an example. It is front-loaded with purpose, though slightly verbose; each sentence serves a purpose.

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?

The description covers parameters well and notes that it returns total notes and ratio (output schema exists). It lacks details on interaction with existing notes or performance considerations, but is adequate for a creation tool.

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 zero schema description coverage, the description provides detailed explanations for each parameter, including constraints (e.g., primary_count 2-16), defaults, and examples (e.g., primary_count=3 in a 3:4 polyrhythm). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 'Create a polyrhythm' with a specific verb and resource, and explains the concept of polyrhythm. It differentiates from siblings like create_hemiola and create_cross_rhythm by focusing on two simultaneous subdivisions.

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 provides clear context and common polyrhythms (3:4, 2:3, etc.), implying usage for cross-rhythms. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare with similar tools such as create_metric_modulation.

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