Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
OpenUtau MCP

OpenUtau MCP

by Tehcnological
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_curve

Reads a part's expression curve (such as dyn, pitd, or tenc) and returns tick/value points plus min, max, and default values for pitch and dynamics editing.

Instructions

Read an expression curve of a part (e.g. dyn, pitd, tenc, brec, genc, voic): [tick, value] points, min/max/default. / パートの表情カーブを読みます（dyn・tenc・brec など）。

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "part": "<part>",
      "abbr": "<abbr>"
    },
    "name": "get_curve"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
abbrYes
partYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; it does disclose the return shape ([tick, value] points plus min/max/default), which is genuinely useful since there is no output schema. However, it says nothing about error behavior, missing-curve cases, or whether 'part' refers to an index or ID.

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?

Front-loaded with the verb and resource, then the return shape, then abbreviation examples — a sensible order. The Japanese sentence is a straight restatement of the English rather than added information, which is minor padding.

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 zero annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description covers the return value and curve-type examples but leaves the 'part' parameter and failure modes undefined. Adequate to attempt a call, not complete.

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 coverage is 0% (only bare 'Abbr' and 'Part' titles), so the description must compensate. It does help for 'abbr' by listing valid example values, but leaves 'part' completely unexplained — no indication of whether it is an index, track-relative position, or ID.

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?

States a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('expression curve of a part') and enumerates concrete curve abbreviations (dyn, pitd, tenc, brec, genc, voic). The verb 'Read' cleanly separates it from the mutating siblings set_curve and clear_curve without needing to name them.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the read counterpart to set_curve/clear_curve, but the description never states when to prefer it or any prerequisites. No explicit when-not or alternative routing is given.

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