Skip to main content
Glama
AudialAI

io.github.AudialAI/audial-mcp

Official
by AudialAI

Audio to MIDI

generate_midi

Transcribe audio files to MIDI by detecting notes and tempo. Provide a local file path; optionally set BPM to override detected tempo for quantisation.

Instructions

Transcribe an audio file to MIDI.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bpmNoOverride the detected tempo for note quantisation.
file_pathYesFull path to a local audio file (.wav, .mp3, .aif, .aiff, .flac, .m4a, .ogg, .aac). ~ is expanded.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toolYes
filesYes
summaryYes
metadataYes
output_dirYes
execution_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context such as output file handling, overwrite behavior, or permission requirements.

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 single sentence is front-loaded and free of waste, clearly stating the core action. It could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose, but the conciseness is appropriate.

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?

The description plus full schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema make invocation possible. However, the lack of usage guidance relative to sibling tools leaves a gap in helping an agent select this tool correctly.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are well documented in the schema itself. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, fitting the baseline of 3 for high coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (Transcribe) and resource (audio file to MIDI), making the purpose clear. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like generate_music or sound2vital, leaving boundaries to inference.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor are any prerequisites or exclusions mentioned. The description only states what the tool does, not when it is appropriate.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.