Skip to main content
Glama
ismail: agent DAW (MCP server)

ismail: agent DAW (MCP server)

Mimic Measure

mimic_measure

Create an instrument mimic profile from recorded notes or pitch-named files, verify capture quality, and estimate playback accuracy for unrecorded pitches.

Instructions

Measure an instrument from recorded notes into a mimic profile (/voices/.mimic.json), then use it as {"type": "mimic", "profile": ""}. notes: [[source, pitch], ...] or [[source, pitch, vel, [t0, t1]]] where source is 'sound:', 'ref', 'ref:' or a path, pitch like 'A4', vel 0..1 (how hard it was played; default vel), [t0, t1] seconds to cut one note out of a longer file. folder: a directory of one-note files named by pitch (A4.wav, Fs3.mp3, C#5.flac) instead of notes. One note per file or window, isolated, a few across the range; two dynamics of the same pitch teach velocity. kind: auto | sustained (bowed, blown, sung) | decaying (plucked, struck). check=True rebuilds every measured note from the OTHER notes and reports how close it lands (leave-one-out), the honest estimate for pitches you did not record. defaults: mimic params stored in the profile and used unless a track overrides them, e.g. the open strings of a bowed instrument {"strings": ["G3", "D4", "A4", "E5"]} (instrument_help(type='mimic') lists them). Each recording is checked first for capture faults that would be learned as the instrument's sound (peaks flattened by a browser mic or a limiter, nothing above 8 kHz from a Bluetooth mic); no_top=True says the instrument has no top, so a missing top is not a fault.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
velNo
kindNoauto
nameYes
checkNo
notesNo
folderNo
no_topNo
projectYes
defaultsNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.4.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / no_top
      Added value: +{
      +  "default": false,
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
  2. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does well: it discloses profile creation, leave-one-out checking, stored defaults, and capture-fault detection. It still does not state what happens if the profile already exists or what permissions or failure modes apply.

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 purpose is front-loaded and the dense detail is justified by the tool's complexity. The long semicolon-heavy paragraph is information-rich but could be more structured for readability.

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?

The description is complete enough for a complex 9-parameter measurement tool: input formats, measurement behavior, defaults, and validation are covered, and an output schema exists. It would be stronger with sibling routing and overwrite/error behavior.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must define the parameters, and it does: notes formats, folder naming, kind options, check behavior, defaults, vel, and no_top are all explained. The path convention also clarifies project and name.

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: measure an instrument from recorded notes into a mimic profile file. It also shows how the resulting profile is used, but it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from nearby instrument or analysis siblings.

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?

It explains how to supply notes or a folder and when check=True is useful, which implies the usage context. However, it does not clearly say when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it.

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