Skip to main content
Glama
romanstark

Dorico Maestro

by romanstark
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

add_rest

Insert a single rest at the caret with the specified duration and automatically exit note-input mode. Solves placing one rest cleanly without lingering input state.

Instructions

Input one rest at the caret, then leave note-input mode cleanly.

One rest at the current caret position, which then advances by that duration.
Note input is always exited afterwards, including when the call fails.

Returns:
    Result dictionary with success, the duration entered, the undo flag and the
    resulting mode.

Note:
    Success means Dorico accepted the command (kOK), not that the rest is where
    it was wanted (docs/protocol.md, 'Command Acceptance vs Effect'). Check with
    get_status or by inspecting the score.

    For a passage rather than one rest, put rest events in a ScoreSpec and use
    write_score: repeated calls here do not chain, because each one re-enters
    note input at the caret. Use goto_bar first to choose where it lands.
    Do not read can_undo as evidence: entering note input alone already sets it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
durationNoRhythmic duration, one of: whole, half, quarter, eighth, sixteenth, 32nd, 64th. Case-insensitive.quarter

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / duration / description
      Added value: +"Rhythmic duration, one of: whole, half, quarter, eighth, sixteenth, 32nd, 64th. Case-insensitive."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations are minimal, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that note-input mode is always exited even on failure, that success means Dorico accepted the command rather than the rest being effective, that calls do not chain, and that can_undo is set merely by entering note input. No contradiction with annotations.

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 description is well-structured with a front-loaded summary, a Returns section, and a Note section. There is minor redundancy between the first and second paragraphs, but the additional detail about failure behavior, result fields, and non-chaining justifies the length.

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

Completeness5/5

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

The description covers the tool's side effects, acceptance semantics, alternatives, required navigation, and common pitfall with can_undo. With an output schema present and annotations available, nothing essential is missing for an agent to call this tool correctly.

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 single parameter `duration` is fully documented in the input schema with accepted values and a default, so 100% schema coverage means the description does not need to repeat parameter details. The description adds behavioral context about the caret advancing by that duration, but this is not required for parameter understanding.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Input one rest at the caret, then leave note-input mode cleanly.' It clearly distinguishes from related tools by emphasizing a single rest and directing passage-level work to write_score.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Usage context is explicit: one rest at the current caret, and for a passage the description directs the agent to put rest events in a ScoreSpec and use write_score instead. It also tells the agent to use goto_bar first and warns not to read can_undo as evidence.

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