Skip to main content
Glama

mcp_opendaw_create_rondo

Generate a rondo with a recurring theme and contrasting episodes. Configure form type, key, scale, tempo, and section length for programmatic music composition.

Instructions

Create a rondo — recurring theme alternating with contrasting episodes.

A rondo is a structural form where a principal theme (A) alternates with contrasting episodes (B, C, D). The theme always returns, providing unity while episodes provide contrast and development.

Form types:

  • simple: ABA (3 sections). Miniature rondo, common in character pieces.

  • classical: ABACA (5 sections). Standard classical rondo (Mozart, Beethoven). A=tonic, B=dominant/relative, C=more distant.

  • seven_part: ABACABA (7 sections). Large rondo, Beethoven Op.51, Chopin Op.16. Extended with second return of B before final A.

  • pop_rock: ABABCB (6 sections). Pop/rock structure masquerading as rondo — verse-chorus-verse-chorus-bridge-chorus. A=verse, B=chorus, C=bridge.

  • jazz: ABAC (4 sections). Jazz standard form — theme, improvisation feel, theme, contrast. A=head, B=solo section, C=trading.

Key root: C, C#, Db, D, ... B. Scale: major, minor, dorian, phrygian, lydian, mixolydian, aeolian, locrian, harmonic_minor, melodic_minor, pentatonic_major, pentatonic_minor, blues, whole_tone.

The A theme uses tonic scale degrees (0, 2, 4, 2, 0). B episode uses dominant/relative degrees (4, 6, 2, 6, 4) — brighter. C episode uses more distant degrees (5, 1, 3, 1, 5) — contrasting. Each section is bars_per_section bars long.

Creates sections sequentially on track_index (melody on track_index, bass on track_index+1).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
key_rootNoC
velocityNo
form_typeNoclassical
tempo_bpmNo
scale_nameNomajor
start_beatNo
unit_indexNo
track_indexNo
bars_per_sectionNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that sections are created sequentially on track_index (melody) and track_index+1 (bass), and it details scale-degree patterns for A, B, and C sections. However, it does not state whether the tool overwrites existing notes, requires pre-created tracks, or has other side effects.

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 long but well-structured and front-loaded with a one-sentence definition. The detailed form list, scale list, and harmonic-degree explanations are useful and relevant. It could trim some redundancy with schema defaults, but overall it earns its length for a complex music-generation tool.

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 the tool's complexity and the complete lack of schema descriptions or annotations, the description provides a rich amount of context: form definitions, scale-degree patterns, track placement, and section length. It omits side-effect and prerequisite details, but the presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values, and the content is comprehensive enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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%, and the description partially compensates by enumerating valid key_root values, scale_name options, and form_type variants, as well as explaining bars_per_section and track_index placement. It does not clarify velocity, tempo_bpm, start_beat, or unit_index, leaving some parameters underspecified.

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 'Create a rondo' and immediately explains the concept as 'recurring theme alternating with contrasting episodes.' It clearly identifies a specific resource/action and distinguishes itself from siblings like create_sonata_form and create_ternary_form by focusing on rondo structure and providing form types.

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 description gives substantial musical context and form-type options, but it never explicitly states when to use this tool over other compositional siblings like create_sonata_form or create_variations. The guidance is implied through the definition of rondo and its forms, but no direct alternatives or exclusions are provided.

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