Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MuseScore MCP Server

MuseScore MCP Server

by ghchen99
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Remove Annotations

remove_annotations

Remove texts, labels, rehearsal marks, tempo markings, and voltas from a bar range to redo part of a chart. Filter by kind or text content.

Instructions

Remove texts and marks from a range of bars, e.g. to redo part of a chart. kinds: 'texts' (add_text: cues, '*' marks, legends), 'labels' (boxed add_label texts), 'rehearsal_marks', 'tempo' (tempo markings, which also changes playback), 'voltas'. contains limits it to texts containing that string, e.g. '**'. Defaults to the whole score. Highlights and note colors are removed with clear_highlights / clear_color instead.

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": "remove_annotations"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
exactNoOnly remove texts equal to `contains` (e.g. "*" but not "**" or a legend)
kindsNoWhat to remove
containsNoOnly remove texts containing this string (text-based kinds)
last_staffNoLast staff (0-based, inclusive). Defaults to the last staff.
end_measureNoLast bar (inclusive). Defaults to the end of the score.
first_staffNoFirst staff (0-based)
start_measureNoFirst bar (1-based position)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose a non-obvious side effect: removing tempo markings 'also changes playback'. It also warns that scope 'Defaults to the whole score', which is important for a destructive operation. It says nothing about reversibility/undo or the response, leaving a modest gap.

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?

Dense and front-loaded: the core action and its target kinds lead, with alternatives at the end where they belong. Every sentence carries information, though the kind enumeration makes it a fairly long unbroken block that could be split for scanability.

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 0-required-parameter destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the definition covers scope defaults, the playback side effect of tempo removal, and sibling routing. What remains missing is whether the removal is undoable and what the call returns.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds real semantic value by explaining what each kind actually contains ('texts' covers add_text cues, '*' marks and legends; 'labels' are boxed add_label texts) and by giving a comparative example for `contains` ('**'). The `exact` interplay with `contains` is left to the schema.

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 ('Remove texts and marks from a range of bars'), enumerates the five removable kinds, and explicitly distinguishes scope from the clear_highlights and clear_color siblings, so an agent can identify it 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 Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives a concrete use case ('to redo part of a chart') and routes two adjacent cases (highlights, note colors) to named alternative tools. It does not distinguish itself from other removal tools like remove_articulations or delete_selection, so guidance is clear but not exhaustive.

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