Skip to main content
Glama

mcp_opendaw_create_cross_rhythm

Create cross-rhythms with independent period lengths per voice for shifting alignments. Specify comma-separated periods like '5,7' to generate patterns realigning after their LCM beats.

Instructions

Create a cross-rhythm — multiple voices with independent period lengths creating shifting alignment.

Unlike polyrhythm (which divides one bar into n and m equal parts), cross-rhythm gives each voice its own period length in beats. The voices cycle independently, creating continuously shifting alignment patterns that only realign after the LCM of all periods.

African cross-rhythms, Steve Reich, Talking Heads, minimalism.

voices: Comma-separated period lengths per voice. E.g., "5,7,3" creates 3 voices with period 5, 7, and 3 beats respectively. 2-6 voices supported. bars: Total length in bars (1-16). The pattern cycles until bars×4 beats is filled. unit_index: AU index. track_index: Note track index. start_beat: Starting beat position. duration: Note duration in beats. base_velocity: Base velocity 0-1. Each voice gets slightly attenuated (voice 0 = full).

Returns total notes created, voice periods, and alignment interval (LCM).

Common cross-rhythms: "5,7" — 5-beat vs 7-beat (African, shifts every 35 beats) "3,4,5" — triple cross-rhythm (minimalism) "4,5,6" — dense shifting pattern "3,5,7" — prime cross-rhythm (longest alignment cycle = 105 beats)

Example: create_cross_rhythm(voices="5,7", bars=8, track_index=0)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
barsNo
voicesYes
durationNo
start_beatNo
unit_indexNo
track_indexNo
base_velocityNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behaviors: independent voice cycling, LCM alignment, bars×4 beat fill, voice attenuation, constraints (2-6 voices, bars 1-16), and return values. However, it does not mention whether existing notes are overwritten or appended, which is a potential side effect for a creation tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is appropriately sized for a complex tool. It is well-organized with sections for definition, contrast, context, parameters, return values, common patterns, and an example. Every sentence adds value, and the first sentence front-loads the core purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite 7 parameters and no annotations, the description covers purpose, parameter semantics, usage context, constraints, return values, and examples. The output schema further reduces the need to explain return structure, but the description also covers it. This is complete for the tool's complexity.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description fully compensates by explaining every parameter: voices format with example, bars range, unit_index, track_index, start_beat, duration, and base_velocity with attenuation behavior. This goes beyond the schema's type/default info, making the tool usable without external knowledge.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource statement: 'Create a cross-rhythm — multiple voices with independent period lengths creating shifting alignment.' It clearly defines what the tool does and explicitly contrasts it with polyrhythm, distinguishing it from sibling tools like mcp_opendaw_create_polyrhythm.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly says 'Unlike polyrhythm...' and explains the difference, providing when-not guidance. It gives musical context (African cross-rhythms, Steve Reich, Talking Heads, minimalism) and common pattern examples, helping the agent decide when to use this tool instead of alternatives.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/ameobius-ai/opendaw-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server