Skip to main content
Glama

Mimic Measure

mimic_measure

Measure an instrument from recorded notes or one-note folders into a reusable profile, so tracks can play realistic parts without re-recording each pitch.

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).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
velNo
kindNoauto
nameYes
checkNo
notesNo
folderNo
projectYes
defaultsNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does add real substance: the output file location, that check=True performs leave-one-out reconstruction and reports error, and that defaults are stored in the profile and applied unless a track overrides them. It does not cover permissions, overwrite risk for an existing profile, or cost/time for large folders.

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 core purpose is front-loaded and most sentences carry unique information, so little is wasted. However, it is a dense run-on block with nested parentheticals that is hard to parse quickly and buries key constraints mid-flow.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, and the description covers the meaningful inputs and behavioral side effects for a complex 8-param tool with a nested defaults object. Gaps are minor, mainly naming project/name explicitly.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% across 8 params, so the description must compensate, and it largely does: it defines the notes tuple shape, folder naming convention, kind enum values with concrete instrument examples, check semantics, vel meaning/default, and defaults contents. Only project and name are left to inference.

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 at a concrete path, and then how to reference that profile. It is clearly distinguishable from analysis siblings, though it never names a competing tool by name for contrast.

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 input (notes vs. folder, the note-tuple format) and mentions instrument_help(type='mimic') for defaults, which implies the intended context. But it never states when to choose this over alternatives like notes_from_audio or instrument_fit, and offers no exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.