Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MuseScore MCP Server

MuseScore MCP Server

by ghchen99
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Set Repeat Barlines

set_repeat_barlines

Add or remove start and end repeat barlines around a range of measures. For MuseScore 4.6+; older versions select measures and indicate palette clicks.

Instructions

Put start and end repeat barlines around a range of measures, or remove them. Needs MuseScore 4.6 or newer; on older versions the measures are selected and the reply says which palette items 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>",
      "end_measure": "<end_measure>"
    },
    "name": "set_repeat_barlines"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
clearNoTrue to remove the repeat barlines instead of adding them
play_countNoHow many times the passage is played in total
end_measureYesMeasure that gets the end repeat (1-based, inclusive)
start_measureYesMeasure that gets the start repeat (1-based)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does add real context: a minimum MuseScore version (4.6) and a described degradation path where the measures are selected and the reply names the palette items to click. It does not mention permissions, side effects on existing repeats, or what a successful reply contains, but the version/fallback disclosure is meaningful.

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 tight sentences with zero waste; the core action is front-loaded and the version caveat follows as secondary context.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description covers the main action, the removal mode, and the version-dependent fallback response, which is the key uncertainty for an agent calling this. A note on how play_count interacts with the placed repeat or on repeat-barline preconditions would make it 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 start_measure, end_measure, clear, and play_count are already documented in the schema. The description adds only the notion of a measure 'range' and that the operation can be a removal, which is marginal beyond the schema's clear flag description.

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 and resource: place start/end repeat barlines around a range of measures, or remove them. That is concrete enough to distinguish the operation from sibling tools like collapse_to_repeat or apply_measure_repeats, though it never explicitly differentiates itself from those neighbors.

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 implied rather than spelled out: the clear flag tells the agent this tool both adds and removes repeats, and the version note explains a fallback path. There is no explicit when-to-use versus when-not guidance and no named alternative for related repeat operations.

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