Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
OpenUtau MCP

OpenUtau MCP

by Tehcnological
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

rank_phonemizers

Rank installed classic phonemizers for a singer by scoring how many phonemes from sample or custom lyrics have samples in the voicebank. Pick the best fit without changing the project.

Instructions

Find the best phonemizer for a singer by trying each installed classic phonemizer on sample lyrics and counting how many of the sounds it asks for exist in the voicebank (score 1.0 = every sound has a sample). language: "EN", "JA" or omitted for both; text: your own lyrics instead of the built-in samples. Nothing in the project changes. / 各音素化器でサンプル歌詞を音素化し、音源にサンプルがある音の割合で順位付けします （1.0 = すべての音にサンプルあり）。プロジェクトは変更しません。

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": {
      "singer": "<singer>"
    },
    "name": "rank_phonemizers"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textNo
singerYes
languageNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and usefully states that nothing in the project changes, implying a read-only evaluation. It also explains the ranking mechanics and score interpretation, though it does not discuss runtime cost, permissions, or the exact return structure.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and behavior, then gives parameter hints and a no-side-effects note. The bilingual duplication adds length without adding information for an English-capable agent, but overall it remains focused and readable.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description does a good job covering purpose, scoring semantics, parameter hints, and non-mutation. It is still missing the exact singer identifier format and a clear statement of the returned ranking structure, which would be helpful for invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It clearly defines language values and the text override, but the required singer parameter is only described as 'for a singer' without specifying whether it expects a name, ID, or other identifier.

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 states a specific verb and resource: find/rank the best phonemizer for a singer by testing installed classic phonemizers against sample lyrics and voicebank coverage. This clearly distinguishes it from list_phonemizers, which would merely enumerate options rather than rank them.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives clear context for use: choosing a phonemizer for a particular singer, optionally with custom lyrics or a language filter. It does not explicitly mention alternatives such as list_phonemizers or state when not to use this tool, so it falls short of full when/when-not guidance.

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