Skip to main content
Glama

add_track

Add a new vocal track to Synthesizer V AI projects for creating and editing vocal content like lyrics and melodies.

Instructions

Add a new track to the project

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoName of the new track

Implementation Reference

  • MCP callTool handler for 'add_track': extracts optional track name, invokes executeCommand to add track via IPC to Lua script, handles response with success message including new track ID or error.
    case "add_track": {
      const args = request.params.arguments as any;
    
      const params: any = {
        name: args.name || "New Track"
      };
    
      const result = await executeCommand("add_track", params);
    
      if (result.error) {
        return {
          content: [{
            type: "text",
            text: `Error: ${result.error}`
          }],
          isError: true
        };
      }
    
      return {
        content: [{
          type: "text",
          text: result.message || `Track "${params.name}" added successfully with ID ${result.trackId}`
        }]
      };
    }
  • Schema and registration for 'add_track' tool: defines name, description, and optional 'name' string parameter in listTools response.
    {
      name: "add_track",
      description: "Add a new track to the project",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          name: {
            type: "string",
            description: "Name of the new track"
          }
        },
        required: []
      }
    },
  • Helper function executeCommand(action, params) used by the add_track handler to serialize command to JSON file for Lua script consumption and await/parse response.
    async function executeCommand(action: string, params: any = {}): Promise<any> {
      const command = {
        action,
        ...params
      };
    
      await writeCommand(command);
      return await readResponse();
    }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Add' implies a mutation, but it doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether this requires specific permissions, if the track is immediately available, what happens on failure, or if there are rate limits. This leaves significant gaps for an 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any wasted words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

Given the complexity of a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what a 'track' is, what the project context entails, or what the tool returns upon success or failure. This leaves the agent with insufficient information for reliable use.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the 'name' parameter clearly documented. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as constraints on track names or examples. Since the schema does the heavy lifting, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the action ('Add') and resource ('a new track to the project'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from its sibling 'list_tracks' or explain what a 'track' is in this context, which would be needed for a perfect score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'edit_notes' or 'get_track_notes'. It doesn't mention prerequisites, such as whether a project must exist first, or specify scenarios where adding a track is appropriate versus not.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

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/ocadaruma/mcp-svstudio'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server