Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MuseScore MCP Server

MuseScore MCP Server

by ghchen99
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Add Rest

add_rest

Inserts a rest at the current cursor position with a specified duration and optionally advances the cursor, enabling precise rhythmic notation in MuseScore.

Instructions

Add a rest at the current cursor position.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "add_rest"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
durationNoDuration as {"numerator": int, "denominator": int} (e.g. {"numerator": 1, "denominator": 4} for a quarter rest)
advance_cursor_after_actionNoWhether to move cursor to next position after adding rest

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It mentions the cursor position, but omits whether the operation mutates the score, how existing content is affected, whether undo is possible, what the return value is, and any permission or mode requirements.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is efficient, though its brevity contributes to the gaps seen in other dimensions.

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 score-mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It does not explain cursor state requirements, potential side effects, or what happens after adding the rest, leaving an agent to infer important behavior.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters, including defaults. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, which is acceptable when schema coverage is complete.

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 (add) and resource (rest) plus a location (current cursor position), making the action clear. It implicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like add_note, but does not explicitly contrast its scope or use case.

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 use this tool versus alternatives, no mention of prerequisites such as needing an active score or a valid cursor position, and no indication of when not to use it.

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