Skip to main content
Glama
elibarnett

kie-mcp

by elibarnett
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

generate_mashup

NEW — Mashup up to 2 Suno tracks into one new track. Provide audioIds from previous generations.

Instructions

NEW — Mashup up to 2 Suno tracks into one new track. Provide audioIds from previous generations.

Input 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
promptNoOptional prompt for mashup direction
taskIdNoSource task ID
audioIdsYesUp to 2 audio IDs to mashup
filenameNo
max_creditsNoRefuse to submit if the estimated cost exceeds this many credits (overrides KIE_MAX_CREDITS_PER_CALL). Estimates come from published rates; kie bills the actual amount.
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.
estimate_onlyNoReturn the estimated credit cost WITHOUT submitting anything. Use before expensive runs (video, 4K, 1080p upgrades, layer splits).
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. Changed2 schema fields changedv5.8.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / estimate_only
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Return the estimated credit cost WITHOUT submitting anything. Use before expensive runs (video, 4K, 1080p upgrades, layer splits).",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / max_credits
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Refuse to submit if the estimated cost exceeds this many credits (overrides KIE_MAX_CREDITS_PER_CALL). Estimates come from published rates; kie bills the actual amount.",
+  "type": "number"
+}
  2. 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"
+]
  3. First observedv4.7.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden and delivers only one sentence. It omits that this consumes credits, that output requires subsequent download, and that blocking vs async behavior is configurable — details that live only in the schema parameter text, not in the description.

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, front-loaded sentences with no padding beyond the 'NEW —' marketing prefix, which is noise but minor. The core scope constraint comes first where an agent will read it.

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 10-parameter generation tool with no annotations and no output schema, a single sentence is thin. It never mentions that the result is an async task costing credits, what the model enum implies for quality, or anything about retrieval of the generated track.

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?

With 80% schema description coverage, the schema already documents the notable parameters (wait/async mode, max_credits, estimate_only, download_dir, max_wait_seconds). The description only restates the audioIds constraint ('up to 2'), adding no format, sourcing, or interaction detail beyond the schema.

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 — mash up Suno tracks into one new track — and gives a bounded scope ('up to 2'). It is clearly distinct from sibling transformations like extend_music, cover_audio, or add_instrumental, though it never names an alternative to contrast against.

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?

'Provide audioIds from previous generations' hints at the input prerequisite but says nothing about when this tool should be chosen over cover_audio, extend_music, or add_vocals. No exclusions, no cost context, no guidance for how many or which tracks are suitable.

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