Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
doricomcp

doricomcp

by kulbiq
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

add_note_marking

Adds ornaments, holds, playing techniques, ties, or articulations to specified score events in Dorico, enabling precise notation edits.

Instructions

kind=ornament (value tr, mordent, inv, turn), hold (fermata, breath, caesura...), playing_technique (value: a name like pizz., arco, con sord., sul pont., ord., or a library id like pta.pizzText), tie, articulation (value staccato...).

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": {
      "event_ids": "<event_ids>",
      "kind": "<kind>"
    },
    "name": "add_note_marking"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
flowNo
kindYes
valueNo
event_idsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

C2.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden, yet it says nothing about side effects, whether the marking is applied to every event_id, whether it replaces an existing marking, error behavior, or permissions. It only discloses the domain of accepted kinds, which is minimal behavioral context.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The text is short with no filler, but it is a bare parenthetical fragment with no leading sentence, so it is not front-loaded with the action or scope. Structure is inconsistent across the listed kinds (tie has no value examples, playing_technique mixes names and ids).

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a mutation tool with four undocumented parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is far too thin: it omits what event_ids and flow mean and what the call returns or does on failure. Only the kind/value vocabulary is covered.

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 0% across four parameters, so the description must compensate. It does add real meaning for kind and value, including valid value examples per kind (tr, mordent, pizz., arco, staccato), but it says nothing about event_ids or flow, leaving half the parameters undocumented.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The name plus the fragment enumerates a resource domain (ornament, hold, playing_technique, tie, articulation), so an agent can infer the tool attaches these markings to notes. But there is no verb-led statement of what the tool does, and no differentiation from sibling add_articulation, which overlaps with kind=articulation here.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description gives no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and never mentions the sibling add_articulation that competes with kind=articulation. The agent must guess the selection criteria.

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