Skip to main content
Glama
romanstark

Dorico Maestro

check_counterpoint

Read-onlyIdempotent

Validate a two-part first-species counterpoint against strict classic rules. Detects rule violations with beat numbers so you can fix errors in your exercise.

Instructions

Check a two-part first-species counterpoint against the classic rules.

Entirely offline and read-only. Enforces the strict set: begin and end on a
perfect consonance, consonant verticals only, no consecutive perfect fifths,
octaves or unisons, no voice crossing, and one melodic climax in the
counterpoint.

Returns:
    Result dictionary with one entry per issue, each naming the rule and the beat
    it happens on. An empty list means the exercise passes.

Note:
    Only first species is implemented, so passing any other species is refused
    rather than checked loosely. The two lines must be the same length, since
    note against note pairs them one to one.

    These rules are stricter than ordinary part-writing on purpose. For a
    chorale or a quartet use check_voice_leading, which applies the
    common-practice rules to any number of voices.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
speciesNoWhich species to check. Only 1, note against note, is implemented. Any other value is refused rather than approximated.
counterpointYesThe line written against it, same notation and the same length: first species is note against note, so the two lists pair up one to one.
cantus_firmusYesThe given line, as scientific pitch names in order, e.g. ['D4', 'F4', 'E4', 'D4'].

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.5
    • changedInput schema / properties / species / description
      Previous value: -"Which species to check. Only 1, note against note, is implemented; any other value is refused rather than approximated."New value: +"Which species to check. Only 1, note against note, is implemented. Any other value is refused rather than approximated."
  2. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.1.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / cantus_firmus / description
      Added value: +"The given line, as scientific pitch names in order, e.g. ['D4', 'F4', 'E4', 'D4']."
    • addedInput schema / properties / counterpoint / description
      Added value: +"The line written against it, same notation and the same length: first species is note against note, so the two lists pair up one to one."
    • addedInput schema / properties / species / description
      Added value: +"Which species to check. Only 1, note against note, is implemented; any other value is refused rather than approximated."
  3. Addedv0.1.1

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, and the description reinforces this with 'Entirely offline and read-only.' It adds valuable behavioral detail beyond annotations: the strict rule set enforced, the refusal of unsupported species, and the result format with an empty list meaning success. These details let an agent predict tool behavior without calling it.

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 well organized: a one-sentence summary, a read-only/offline note, the rule list, return semantics, and caveats. Every sentence adds useful information, and the most important scoping facts are front-loaded. No filler or repetition.

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 tool checks a specialized music-theory concept, but the description covers scope, restrictions, failure modes, return value semantics, and alternatives. Combined with the rich input schema and output schema, an agent has everything needed to decide whether and how to invoke it 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters with types and examples. The description reinforces the same-length and one-to-one pairing constraints, but those are also present in the schema. It does not add substantial new parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Check a two-part first-species counterpoint against the classic rules.' This immediately distinguishes the tool from the sibling check_voice_leading by narrowing scope to two-part first-species counterpoint. The listed rules further clarify exactly what the tool checks.

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?

The description gives explicit usage conditions: only first species is implemented, other species are refused, and the two lines must be the same length. It also names the alternative tool, check_voice_leading, and states when to use that instead ('for a chorale or a quartet'). This is exemplary guidance for an agent deciding between sibling tools.

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

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/romanstark/dorico-maestro'

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