Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MuseScore MCP Server

MuseScore MCP Server

by ghchen99
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Add Volta

add_volta

Adds a first or second ending bracket over a range of measures and sets repeat passes; if the plugin API fails, it selects the measures and reports the palette item to click.

Instructions

Add a volta (1st/2nd ending bracket) over a range of measures. Experimental: the plugin API has no dedicated volta call, so check the result; if it fails, the measures are selected and the reply says which palette item to click.

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_volta"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textNoVolta label. Defaults to the endings, e.g. "1." or "1, 2."
endingsNoWhich repeat passes play this ending, e.g. [1] for a first ending, [2] for a second
end_measureNoLast measure under the volta (1-based, inclusive). Defaults to start_measure.
start_measureYesFirst measure under the volta (1-based)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does add real behavioral context: it flags the tool as Experimental, explains that the plugin API has no dedicated volta call, and discloses the fallback state (measures selected, reply names the palette item). It stops short of saying whether a failed attempt leaves any partial markup or what a successful reply contains.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, followed by the experimental caveat and recovery step. No filler, and the caveat is placed where an agent will read it before calling.

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 four-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the definition covers the purpose and the important failure path. The remaining gap is the success response and whether the score must be in a particular state beforehand, but that is a minor omission given the fully documented schema.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds only the notion of a measure range, which the end_measure/start_measure descriptions already cover; it adds nothing about how 'endings' interacts with the auto-generated 'text' label.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Add a volta (1st/2nd ending bracket)') plus the scope ('over a range of measures'), which distinguishes it from the many sibling 'add_*' marking tools such as add_tuplet or add_rehearsal_mark. An agent can tell what it produces without opening the schema.

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?

Usage is only implied by the resource name – there is no statement of when to prefer this over other marking tools or what preconditions (cursor/selection, measure validity) must hold. The one useful piece of guidance is the failure branch: 'check the result; if it fails... click' the palette item, which tells the agent how to recover rather than when to use the tool.

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