Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MuseScore MCP Server

MuseScore MCP Server

by ghchen99
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Ping Musescore

ping_musescore

Verifies the MuseScore WebSocket API connection to confirm the editor is reachable before sending commands.

Instructions

Ping the MuseScore WebSocket API to check connection.

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": "ping_musescore"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the call targets the WebSocket API and serves as a connectivity check, but says nothing about what a failed ping looks like, whether it can time out, or whether it mutates session state. For a trivial zero-parameter probe the risk is low, but the disclosure is thin.

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?

A single short sentence with the action and purpose front-loaded and no filler. Nothing could be removed without losing meaning.

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?

Given a zero-parameter connectivity probe with no output schema, the description covers the essentials. The only real gap is the absence of any hint about the result — e.g., a boolean or status message — which would help an agent interpret the response, but that is a minor omission for this complexity level.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool takes no parameters and the schema is an empty object, so there is no parameter meaning to add. Baseline of 4 applies; nothing in the description misrepresents the argument-free signature.

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 names a specific action (ping) against a specific resource (the MuseScore WebSocket API) and states its intent (check connection). An agent can tell it is a health-check probe rather than a score-editing operation, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling connect_to_musescore.

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?

The phrase 'to check connection' implies when the tool is useful, but there is no explicit guidance such as 'call before issuing score commands' or 'use this instead of connect_to_musescore when the session may already be established.' Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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