MMAudio MCP
OfficialClick on "Install Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type
@followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@MMAudio MCPcreate audio for a meditation video with peaceful nature sounds"
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
MMAudio MCP
AI-powered video-to-audio and text-to-audio generation using MMAudio's advanced AI technology. This Desktop Extension implements the Model Context Protocol (MCP) to provide seamless integration with Cursor, Claude Desktop, and other MCP-compatible clients.
š Features
Video-to-Audio Generation: Transform video content into synchronized audio with AI-powered analysis
Text-to-Audio Generation: Create professional audio content from text descriptions
API Key Validation: Verify MMAudio API credentials and check account status
MCP Protocol: Full Model Context Protocol implementation for universal compatibility
Error Handling: Comprehensive error handling with detailed feedback
Type Safety: Full TypeScript support with Zod schema validation
Configurable: Flexible configuration options for different use cases
Related MCP server: MusicGPT MCP Server
š Quick Start
Prerequisites
Node.js >= 18.0.0
MMAudio API key (Get one here)
MCP-compatible client (Cursor, Claude Desktop, etc.)
Installation
Clone or download this extension:
cd mcp npm installConfigure your API key:
# Set environment variable export MMAUDIO_API_KEY="sk-your-api-key-here" # Or create a config.js file (copy from config.example.js) cp config.example.js config.js # Edit config.js with your API keyTest the installation:
npm startLink the package:
npm link
Usage with Cursor
Add to your Cursor MCP configuration:
{ "mcpServers": { "mmaudio": { "command": "npx", "args": ["-y", "mmaudio-mcp@latest"], "env": { "MMAUDIO_API_KEY": "sk-your-api-key-here" } } } }Restart Cursor and the MMAudio tools will be available in your AI assistant.
Usage with Claude Desktop
Add to your Claude Desktop configuration (
claude_desktop_config.json):{ "mcpServers": { "mmaudio": { "command": "npx", "args": ["-y", "mmaudio-mcp@latest"], "env": { "MMAUDIO_API_KEY": "sk-your-api-key-here" } } } }Restart Claude Desktop to load the extension.
š ļø Available Tools
1. Video-to-Audio Generation
Generate AI-powered audio from video content.
Tool Name: video_to_audio
Parameters:
video_url(required): URL of the video fileprompt(required): Description of the audio you want to generatenegative_prompt(optional): What to avoid in the generated audioduration(optional): Audio duration in seconds (1-30, default: 8)num_steps(optional): Number of inference steps (1-50, default: 25)cfg_strength(optional): Guidance strength (1-10, default: 4.5)seed(optional): Random seed for reproducible results
Example:
Generate audio for this video: https://example.com/video.mp4 with the prompt "peaceful forest sounds with birds chirping and gentle wind"2. Text-to-Audio Generation
Create audio content from text descriptions.
Tool Name: text_to_audio
Parameters:
prompt(required): Description of the audio you want to generateduration(optional): Audio duration in seconds (1-30, default: 8)num_steps(optional): Number of inference steps (1-50, default: 25)cfg_strength(optional): Guidance strength (1-10, default: 4.5)negative_prompt(optional): What to avoid in the generated audioseed(optional): Random seed for reproducible results
Example:
Create audio with the description "coffee shop ambiance with gentle chatter and espresso machine sounds"3. API Key Validation
Validate your MMAudio API key and check account status.
Tool Name: validate_api_key
Parameters:
api_key(optional): API key to validate (uses configured key if not provided)
Example:
Validate my MMAudio API keyāļø Configuration
Environment Variables
Variable | Description | Required | Default |
| Your MMAudio API key | Yes | - |
| Base URL for MMAudio API | No |
|
| Request timeout in milliseconds | No |
|
| Log level (error, warn, info, debug) | No |
|
| Enable debug mode | No |
|
Configuration File
You can also use a config.js file for configuration:
export const config = {
apiKey: "sk-your-api-key-here",
baseUrl: "https://mmaudio.net",
timeout: 60000,
// ... other options
};š Example Usage
Video-to-Audio Example
// In your MCP client (Cursor, Claude Desktop, etc.)
"Please generate audio for this video URL: https://example.com/nature_video.mp4";
"I want forest sounds with birds chirping and a gentle breeze";
"Duration should be 10 seconds";Text-to-Audio Example
// Create ambient audio
"Generate 15 seconds of coffee shop ambiance with gentle background chatter";
// Create sound effects
"Create the sound of rain falling on a wooden roof for 8 seconds";
// Create atmospheric audio
"Generate futuristic sci-fi ambient sounds for a space station";š§ Development
Project Structure
mcp/
āāā server/index.js # Main MCP server implementation
āāā package.json # Node.js dependencies and scripts
āāā manifest.json # DXT extension manifest
āāā config.example.js # Configuration example
āāā README.md # This fileTesting
Test the server directly:
npm startTest with a simple MCP client:
echo '{"jsonrpc": "2.0", "method": "tools/list", "id": 1}' | npm start
Development Mode
Run the server in development mode with debugging:
npm run devThis enables additional logging and the Node.js inspector for debugging.
šØ Troubleshooting
Common Issues
1. "API key is required" Error
Problem: The extension can't find your API key.
Solution:
Ensure you've set the
MMAUDIO_API_KEYenvironment variableOr create a
config.jsfile with your API keyVerify the API key is correct and active
2. "Connection refused" or Network Errors
Problem: Can't connect to MMAudio API.
Solution:
Check your internet connection
Verify the base URL is correct
Check if there are any firewall restrictions
3. "Insufficient credits" Error
Problem: Your MMAudio account doesn't have enough credits.
Solution:
Check your account balance at mmaudio.net/dashboard
Purchase additional credits if needed
Use the
validate_api_keytool to check your account status
4. MCP Client Not Detecting Extension
Problem: Your MCP client (Cursor, Claude Desktop) doesn't show MMAudio tools.
Solution:
Verify the configuration path in your MCP client settings
Ensure Node.js is in your PATH
Check the server logs for errors
Restart your MCP client
Debug Mode
Enable debug mode for detailed logging:
DEBUG=true MMAUDIO_API_KEY=your-key node server/index.jsLogs
The server logs to stderr. You can redirect logs to a file:
node server/index.js 2> mmaudio.logš API Reference
Response Format
All tools return responses in this format:
{
"content": [
{
"type": "text",
"text": "{\"success\": true, \"message\": \"...\", \"result\": {...}}"
}
]
}Success Response Example
{
"success": true,
"message": "Audio generated successfully from text",
"result": {
"audio_url": "https://example.com/generated_audio.wav",
"content_type": "audio/wav",
"file_name": "generated_audio.wav",
"file_size": 1024000,
"duration": 8,
"prompt": "coffee shop ambiance"
}
}Error Response Example
{
"success": false,
"error": "Invalid API key. Please check your MMAudio API key.",
"code": "INVALID_REQUEST"
}š Security
API keys are handled securely and not logged
All requests use HTTPS
The extension runs in a sandboxed environment
No sensitive data is stored locally
š Related Documentation
š¤ Contributing
Fork the repository
Create a feature branch
Make your changes
Add tests if applicable
Submit a pull request
š License
This project is licensed under the MIT License - see the LICENSE file for details.
š¬ Support
Made with ā¤ļø by the MMAudio Team
Available Tools
3 toolstext_to_audioB
Generate AI-powered audio content from text descriptions using MMAudio technology. Create sound effects, ambient audio, music, and atmospheric soundscapes from natural language descriptions.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| prompt | Yes | Describe the audio you want to generate (e.g., "rain falling on leaves", "coffee shop ambiance", "futuristic sci-fi sounds") | |
| duration | No | Duration of generated audio in seconds | |
| num_steps | No | Number of inference steps (higher = better quality, slower) | |
| cfg_strength | No | Classifier-free guidance strength (higher = more adherence to prompt) | |
| negative_prompt | No | Describe what you want to avoid in the generated audio (optional) | |
| seed | No | Random seed for reproducible results |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'AI-powered' and 'MMAudio technology' but doesn't cover critical aspects like rate limits, authentication needs, output format, or potential costs/latency. The description is insufficient for a tool with 6 parameters and no annotation support.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is efficiently structured in two sentences: the first states the core functionality, and the second provides concrete examples. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or wasted text, making it easy to parse quickly.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a complex audio generation tool with 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (audio format, file type, size), error conditions, or practical constraints. The examples help but don't compensate for missing behavioral and output information.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all 6 parameters. The description adds no specific parameter information beyond what's in the schema, meeting the baseline of 3 where the schema does the heavy lifting. No additional semantic context is provided for parameters.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Generate AI-powered audio content from text descriptions using MMAudio technology.' It specifies the action (generate), resource (audio content), and technology (MMAudio), and distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on text-to-audio generation rather than validation or video conversion.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage through examples ('sound effects, ambient audio, music, and atmospheric soundscapes'), but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'video_to_audio'. It provides context for generating audio from text but doesn't state exclusions or compare to sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
validate_api_keyC
Validate MMAudio API key and check account credits/status
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| api_key | No | MMAudio API key to validate (optional, uses configured key if not provided) |
TDQS
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 states the tool validates an API key and checks account credits/status, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as what happens on validation failure (e.g., error messages), whether it makes network calls, rate limits, authentication requirements beyond the key, or the format of the status response. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation coverage.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary words. Every part earns its place by specifying the tool's actions and targets, making it appropriately sized for its function.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool's complexity (validation with potential network interaction), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., credit balance, validation result), error conditions, or behavioral details, leaving gaps for an AI agent to use it correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the parameter 'api_key' fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides (e.g., it doesn't explain key format or validation rules). With high schema coverage, the baseline is 3, as the description doesn't compensate but doesn't need to.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's purpose with specific verbs ('validate', 'check') and resources ('MMAudio API key', 'account credits/status'). It distinguishes this as a validation/status-checking tool rather than a processing tool like its siblings (text_to_audio, video_to_audio). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from potential sibling validation tools (none listed), so it falls short of a perfect 5.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., before using text_to_audio), when not to use it, or how it relates to sibling tools. The only implied usage is for validation, but this is basic and lacks context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
video_to_audioB
Generate AI-powered audio from video content using MMAudio technology. Analyzes video frames and generates synchronized audio including sound effects, ambient noise, and atmospheric elements.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| video_url | Yes | URL of the video file to generate audio for (supports mp4, webm, avi, mov formats) | |
| prompt | Yes | Describe the audio you want to generate (e.g., "forest sounds with birds chirping", "urban traffic noise", "peaceful ocean waves") | |
| negative_prompt | No | Describe what you want to avoid in the generated audio (optional) | |
| seed | No | Random seed for reproducible results (optional) | |
| num_steps | No | Number of inference steps (higher = better quality, slower) | |
| duration | No | Duration of generated audio in seconds | |
| cfg_strength | No | Classifier-free guidance strength (higher = more adherence to prompt) |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that the tool 'analyzes video frames and generates synchronized audio', implying processing and creation, but fails to disclose critical traits like whether it's a read-only or destructive operation, rate limits, authentication needs, or output format (e.g., file type, size). This leaves significant gaps for an AI agent to understand the tool's behavior.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is concise and front-loaded, with two sentences that directly state the tool's purpose and key functionality. Every sentence earns its place by explaining the core action and the types of audio generated, though it could be slightly more structured by explicitly listing output details.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the complexity of a 7-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks information on the output (e.g., audio format, how to access it), error handling, performance expectations, or any constraints beyond what's implied. This makes it inadequate for an AI agent to fully understand the tool's context and usage.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what's in the schema, such as explaining interactions between parameters or providing usage examples. However, since the schema is comprehensive, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the description doesn't need to compensate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's purpose with specific verbs ('generate AI-powered audio from video content') and resources ('video content'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'text_to_audio' by specifying video input. It also mentions the technology used ('MMAudio technology'), which adds specificity.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'text_to_audio' or 'validate_api_key'. It lacks explicit instructions on prerequisites, such as whether the video must be pre-processed or if there are usage limits, leaving the agent without context for tool selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
3 tool updates
- First observed
text_to_audio - First observed
validate_api_key - First observed
video_to_audio
TDQS
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: text_to_audio generates audio from text, video_to_audio generates audio from video, and validate_api_key handles authentication. There is no overlap in functionality, making it easy for an agent to select the right tool.
All tool names follow a consistent snake_case pattern with clear verb_noun structure (text_to_audio, video_to_audio, validate_api_key). The naming is predictable and readable throughout the set.
With only 3 tools, the server feels thin for its apparent audio generation domain. While the core functions are covered, typical MCP servers in this space might include additional tools for managing audio files, adjusting parameters, or retrieving generated content.
The toolset covers the essential operations for AI-powered audio generation from text and video, plus API validation. However, there are minor gaps such as no tools for editing, listing, or deleting generated audio, which could limit agent workflows in more complex scenarios.
Maintenance
Resources
Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.
Looking for Admin?
If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.
Related MCP Connectors
Turn any LLM multimodal; generate images, voices, videos, 3D models, music, and more.
Generate AI videos, images, audio and staged AI Video Story episodes, and publish them to social.
- RendobarOAuthcom.rendobar
Transform video, audio and images, and generate media from prompts. FFmpeg, captions, models.
Generate images, video, music, voice and 3D through one API. 30 tools, 200+ models.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables video generation from text prompts or images using Google's Veo 3 API. Supports multiple models, audio generation, and various aspect ratios for creating high-quality videos.2MIT
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceProvides AI-powered audio generation and processing through the MusicGPT API, enabling music creation, voice conversion, audio manipulation, stem extraction, and audio analysis capabilities.24171MIT
- FlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceEnables AI agents to generate music and audio content using the MiniMax Music API through text prompts, with support for reference audio and lyric generation.15-
- FlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceProvides a audio/video creation toolbox via MCP protocol, enabling natural language-based video editing tasks such as image-to-video, video merging, subtitle extraction, and more.93-
Latest Blog Posts
- Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)By Om-Shree-0709 on .mcpAgent IdentityOAuth 2.1
- Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an InternBy Om-Shree-0709 on .Agent IdentityMCP SecurityOAuth Delegation
- Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)By Om-Shree-0709 on .Agentic AiPrompt InjectionWebAssembly
MCP directory API
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/mmaudio/mmaudio-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server