Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Dorico MCP Server

Dorico MCP Server

by happycastle114
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_flows

Retrieve a list of separate musical sections (flows) in the current Dorico project, with their IDs and names.

Instructions

Get list of flows in the current project.

Flows are separate musical sections within a Dorico project.

Returns: List of flows with IDs and names

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": "get_flows"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It indicates a read-only operation ('Get list') and defines the return structure, but does not explicitly state lack of side effects or permissions. It is mostly transparent.

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 concise with three sentences. It could be slightly more streamlined, but it effectively front-loads the main action and provides essential context without unnecessary detail.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a parameterless tool with an output schema, the description fully covers the purpose, explains what flows are, and states the return type. There are no gaps in contextual completeness.

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 has no parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (empty schema). According to the rubric, baseline is 4 for 0 parameters. The description adds no parameter details, but none are needed.

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?

The description clearly states that the tool gets a list of flows, defines flows as 'separate musical sections', and specifies the return format. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_layouts by focusing on flows.

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?

The description implies usage when needing to retrieve flow information, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide contextual prerequisites. However, given the simplicity, the purpose is clear.

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