Dorico Maestro

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

save

Destructive

Write the open Dorico project to its existing file on disk. Use only if the project has a file path; otherwise, export to PDF or MusicXML.

Instructions

Save the open project over its existing file on disk.

Sends File.Save, which writes the project in place. A project that has never
been saved has no path to write to, so this cannot be relied on to save one:
check that the project has a file before treating it as a save.

Returns:
    Result dictionary reporting whether the command was accepted.

Note:
    When to use: Save changes in an already-saved project file on disk.
    When NOT to use: Do not use if the project has never been saved (has no
    path). To produce a file for external use without altering the open
    project file, use export_pdf or export_musicxml instead.

    Acceptance is not completion here either (docs/protocol.md, "Command
    Acceptance vs Effect"), so a kOK does not prove the file on disk has changed.

    This overwrites the .dorico project file in place.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses that the tool overwrites the .dorico file in place, that acceptance (kOK) does not guarantee the file changed, and that the command has no effect on unsaved projects. This goes well beyond the destructiveHint annotation and gives the agent important behavioral expectations.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and uses clear Returns and Note sections. It is slightly repetitive in places (e.g., restating 'in place' and 'overwrite'), but the overall structure is readable and each section contributes operational guidance.

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?

For a zero-parameter save operation with an output schema present, the description covers all the essential context: the action, the precondition (already saved), the destructive effect, the acceptance caveat, and alternatives. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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?

There are no parameters and the schema coverage is 100%, so no additional parameter documentation is needed. The description's zero-parameter nature makes this dimension trivially satisfied; a 4 is appropriate rather than 5 because there is no parameter semantics to add at all.

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 ('Save the open project over its existing file on disk') and clearly distinguishes it from export alternatives like export_pdf and export_musicxml. It is immediately obvious what the tool does and how it differs from siblings.

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 provides explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance, including the key limitation that it cannot save a project that has never been saved. It also names the alternatives to use for exports, giving the agent clear decision criteria.

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