Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MuseScore MCP Server

MuseScore MCP Server

by ghchen99
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Add Articulation

add_articulation

Adds articulations like half-open hi-hat, accent, or staccato to chords for selected drums within a bar and beat range, leaving existing symbols unchanged.

Instructions

Add an articulation to the chords that contain the chosen drums in a range of bars (and beats): 'half_open' (half-open hi-hat), 'open', 'closed' (hi-hat), 'accent', 'marcato', 'staccato', 'tenuto'. E.g. drums=['hi-hat'], symbol='half_open' marks the hi-hats of bars 72-85 as half-open. Chords that already have it are left alone. Remove with remove_articulations.

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": {
      "start_measure": "<start_measure>"
    },
    "name": "add_articulation"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
drumsNoDrums whose chords get it, e.g. ["hi-hat"]
symbolNoArticulation to addhalf_open
pitchesNoMIDI pitches whose chords get it (with drums; all chords if both empty)
end_beatNoLast beat in end_measure to include, the whole beat (e.g. 4 = through the end of beat 4). Defaults to the end of the measure.
last_staffNoLast staff (0-based, inclusive). Defaults to the last staff.
start_beatNoBeat in start_measure where coloring starts (1-based; fractions allowed, e.g. 3.5 for the 'and' of 3). A beat is the time signature's denominator: a quarter in 4/4, an eighth in 6/8. Defaults to the start of the measure.
end_measureNoLast bar (inclusive). Defaults to start_measure.
first_staffNoFirst staff (0-based)
start_measureYesFirst bar (1-based position)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the burden and it does disclose one important behavior: 'Chords that already have it are left alone' (idempotent/no-op on existing articulations). However, it says nothing about permissions, whether the edit affects the underlying score irreversibly, what happens with out-of-range measures, or what the call returns.

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?

Roughly three front-loaded sentences: purpose, enumeration of symbols, and a worked example, plus the removal pointer. Dense and largely waste-free, though the parenthetical explanations of 'half_open'/'closed' partly duplicate the enum values in the schema.

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?

For a 9-parameter mutation tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose, valid symbols, targeting semantics, idempotency, and the removal counterpart. It leaves return values and error/edge behavior unstated, which keeps it just short of complete.

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 100%, so every parameter is already documented, which sets the baseline at 3. The description adds only a small amount of meaning — the interaction of drums with symbol and the example call — and does not explain the drums/pitches combination or beat-range semantics beyond what the schema states.

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 names a specific verb (add) and resource (articulation) and enumerates the exact accepted symbol values. It also clarifies targeting ('chords that contain the chosen drums in a range of bars') and gives a concrete drums=['hi-hat'], symbol='half_open', bars 72-85 example, which distinguishes it from the inverse sibling remove_articulations.

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?

Usage context is clear: apply articulations to chords filtered by drum/pitch over a bar/beat range, and it explicitly routes removal to remove_articulations. It does not state when-not to use the tool or any prerequisites (e.g., selection requirements), but the scope is well enough bounded to call correctly.

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