Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
OpenUtau MCP

OpenUtau MCP

by Tehcnological
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

new_project

Create a new empty project in OpenUtau; use force=true to discard unsaved changes when starting over.

Instructions

Start a new empty project. force=true discards unsaved changes. / 新規プロジェクトを作成します。force=true で未保存の変更を破棄します。

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "new_project"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
forceNo

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?

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the destructive side effect of force=true (discarding unsaved changes), which is the key hazard, but says nothing about what happens to the current project, whether the call errors when unsaved changes exist and force is false, or what the call returns.

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?

Two short sentences with the purpose first and the risk second — well front-loaded. The full Japanese restatement doubles the length without adding information, which is the only waste.

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?

For a one-optional-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description covers purpose and the one dangerous flag. It is nearly sufficient; only the behavior of the non-force path (error vs. silent) is left unstated.

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 description coverage is 0% for the single parameter, so the description must supply the meaning — and it does, explaining that force=true discards unsaved changes, which is precisely the semantic the schema lacks. Minor gap: it doesn't state that force defaults to false.

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 and resource: 'Start a new empty project.' An agent can distinguish it from open_project/save_project by the 'new' and 'empty' qualifiers, though the description never explicitly names those siblings as alternatives.

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 condition for force is implied ('force=true discards unsaved changes'), which tells the agent when the flag matters, but there is no explicit guidance on when to call new_project instead of open_project, or whether unsaved work should be saved first.

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