Skip to main content
Glama

mcp_opendaw_merge_consecutive_notes

Merge consecutive notes of same pitch into single sustained notes to clean up repeated hits, convert staccato patterns, or simplify busy passages.

Instructions

Merge consecutive notes of the same pitch into single sustained notes.

Scans notes sorted by position. When two notes have the same pitch and the gap between them is within max_gap_beats, they are merged into one note spanning from the first note's start to the last note's end. Useful for cleaning up repeated hits, converting staccato patterns to sustained notes, or simplifying busy passages.

Args: unit_index: Audio unit index track_index: Note track index region_index: Region index (-1 = first region) same_pitch_only: If True, only merge notes with identical pitch. If False, merge any consecutive notes regardless of pitch (uses first note's pitch for the merged result). max_gap_beats: Maximum gap between note end and next note start to qualify for merging (0.0 = touching/overlapping only, 0.25 = up to a 16th note gap, 1.0 = up to 1 beat gap). velocity_mode: Velocity for merged note — "first" = use first note's velocity, "last" = use last note's velocity, "max" = use highest velocity, "avg" = use average velocity across merged notes.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
unit_indexYes
track_indexYes
region_indexNo
max_gap_beatsNo
velocity_modeNofirst
same_pitch_onlyNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

The description thoroughly explains the behavioral algorithm: scanning sorted notes, merging based on pitch and gap, and handling the `same_pitch_only` flag. It does not mention whether the operation is destructive or reversible, but given no annotations, the description provides good insight into what the tool does.

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 clear purpose statement followed by algorithm explanation and parameter details. It is slightly verbose but front-loaded with the most important information, making it easy for an AI agent to understand.

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 all parameters and the merge algorithm comprehensively. It does not mention error conditions, preconditions (e.g., notes must exist), or undo behavior. An output schema exists, so missing return value explanation is acceptable. Minor gaps prevent a perfect score.

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 0% schema description coverage, the tool's description includes a detailed 'Args:' block that explains each parameter's meaning, including `max_gap_beats` with examples (0.0, 0.25, 1.0) and `velocity_mode` options ('first', 'last', 'max', 'avg'). This adds significant value beyond the JSON 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 the tool's purpose: 'Merge consecutive notes of the same pitch into single sustained notes.' It explains the scanning logic and distinguishes from sibling tools like merge_note_regions and merge_note_tracks by focusing on same-pitch consecutive notes.

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 provides context for use: 'Useful for cleaning up repeated hits, converting staccato patterns to sustained notes, or simplifying busy passages.' However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare with alternatives such as merge_note_regions or merge_note_tracks.

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