Skip to main content
Glama
KyaniteLabs

kinocut

by KyaniteLabs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

audio_compose

Mix multiple WAV tracks with per-track volume, start offsets, and looping into a single timed output file. Set total duration and output path for layered audio composition.

Instructions

Layer multiple audio tracks with volume mixing.

Mix multiple WAV files together with individual volume control.

Args: tracks: List of track configs with: - file: Absolute path to WAV file - volume: Volume multiplier 0-1 - start: Start time offset in seconds - loop: Whether to loop the track (default false) duration: Total output duration in seconds. output_path: Absolute path for the output WAV file.

Returns: Dict with success status and output_path.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tracksYes
durationYes
overwriteNoExplicitly allow replacing existing media. Existing non-media files are protected.
output_pathYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.16.4
    • addedInput schema / properties / overwrite
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Explicitly allow replacing existing media. Existing non-media files are protected.",
+  "title": "Overwrite",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv1.16.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  3. Addedv1.5.1

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses useful details such as WAV-only input, volume multiplier range 0-1, loop default false, and a success/output_path return shape, but it omits overwrite safety behavior, error conditions, and what happens when duration exceeds or truncates track length.

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 definition is front-loaded and organized with Args and Returns sections. There is minor redundancy between the opening two sentences, but overall it is efficient and easy to scan.

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 a nested tracks argument and an existing output schema, the description provides enough core invocation detail for an agent to construct a valid call. The main omission is the optional overwrite parameter and its mutation-safety implications, though the schema documents that field.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is low at 25%, and the schema defines tracks only as a generic array of objects. The description compensates by documenting nested track fields (file, volume, start, loop), as well as duration and output_path. The overwrite parameter is not mentioned in the description, but its semantics are supplied by the schema.

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?

The description states a clear verb and resource: "Layer multiple audio tracks with volume mixing" and "Mix multiple WAV files together." It does not explicitly distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as audio_sequence, video_mix_audio, or sound_mix_render, so it is clear but lacks sibling differentiation.

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?

It describes what the tool does but gives no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives. There are many audio/mixing siblings, and the description neither names them nor states exclusions or prerequisites.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools