Skip to main content
Glama
elibarnett

kie-mcp

by elibarnett
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

cover_audio

Create an AI cover from an uploaded audio URL, applying custom vocals, style, and instrumentation via Suno.

Instructions

Create an AI cover from uploaded audio — custom vocals, style, and instrumentation via Suno.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
waitNoSet false to submit and return immediately with the task_id (async mode) — then poll with check_task and fetch with download_result. Recommended for long generations to avoid client-side watchdog timeouts.
modelNoV5
styleNo
titleNo
promptNoDescription of desired cover style
filenameNo
uploadUrlYesURL of audio to cover
customModeNo
vocalGenderNoVocal gender preference
download_dirNoAbsolute directory to save the file(s) into (created if missing). Defaults to the server's kie/assets/raw/. Must be absolute — the MCP server's working directory is not the caller's.
instrumentalNo
negativeTagsNoTags to avoid in the cover
max_wait_secondsNoOverride the blocking-mode polling budget in seconds (default: audio 300). Ignored when wait=false.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv5.5.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / model / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "V3_5",
-  "V4",
-  "V4_5",
-  "V4_5PLUS",
-  "V4_5ALL",
-  "V5",
-  "V5_5"
-]New value: +[
+  "V4",
+  "V4_5",
+  "V4_5PLUS",
+  "V4_5ALL",
+  "V5",
+  "V5_5",
+  "V6",
+  "V6_MINI",
+  "V6_WILD"
+]
  2. First observedv4.7.0

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it discloses almost nothing: it does not say the operation is asynchronous/blocking by default, that it consumes credits, that generation can take minutes, or what comes back. The single sentence gives only the creative intent, not the operational behavior.

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?

One compact, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though the extreme brevity is part of the tool's under-specification problem rather than a virtue.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a 13-parameter generation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and only 54% parameter coverage, a single sentence is not enough. The async/polling workflow, credit cost, and result shape are all unaddressed at the description level.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is only 54%, and the description adds nothing beyond loosely echoing three fields (vocals, style, instrumentation). It does not clarify the distinction between style, prompt, and negativeTags, what customMode does, or how model choice affects the cover.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: create an AI cover from uploaded audio, with the field hints (vocals, style, instrumentation) and the backend (Suno). An agent can distinguish it from siblings like generate_music or add_vocals, but the description never names or contrasts those alternatives explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to choose a cover over generate_music, extend_music, or add_vocals, nor any stated prerequisites for the source audio. Usage is only implied by the name and the mention of 'uploaded audio'.

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