Skip to main content
Glama
runapi-ai

suno-mcp

by runapi-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

inspire_music

Create a Suno music generation task from one to four reference audio URLs, returning task ID, status, and output URLs for tracking.

Instructions

Create a Suno task on RunAPI (inspire music). Returns a task id, status, and output URLs.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
waitNoPoll until the task reaches a terminal status.
modelNoRunAPI model slug for this model line.
audio_urlsYesOne to four audio URLs that guide the new music. Declared type: array.
timeout_msNo
callback_urlNoWebhook URL for async notifications. Declared type: string.
poll_interval_msNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changedv0.4.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +{}
    • changedInput schema / properties / audio_urls / description
      Previous value: -"One to four audio URLs that guide the new music."New value: +"One to four audio URLs that guide the new music. Declared type: array."
    • removedInput schema / properties / audio_urls / maxItems
      Removed value: -4
    • removedInput schema / properties / audio_urls / minItems
      Removed value: -1
    • changedInput schema / properties / callback_url / description
      Previous value: -"Webhook URL for async notifications."New value: +"Webhook URL for async notifications. Declared type: string."
    • removedInput schema / properties / model / enum
      Removed value: -[
-  "suno-v4",
-  "suno-v4.5",
-  "suno-v4.5-plus",
-  "suno-v5",
-  "suno-v5.5"
-]
  2. Addedv0.3.2

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
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. It discloses the return shape (task id, status, output URLs), which is genuinely useful, but says nothing about mutation side effects, the async/polling nature implied by the wait, timeout_ms, and poll_interval_ms parameters, callback behavior, or auth/rate-limit requirements.

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?

Two tight sentences that are front-loaded with the action and the backend, followed by the return values. The parenthetical '(inspire music)' is redundant with the name but costs little.

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?

A six-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema should do much more: it never explains that the call is asynchronous, how 'wait' interacts with timeout_ms/poll_interval_ms and callback_url, or when this model line is appropriate. The return-value sentence is the only substantive disclosure.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 67%; timeout_ms and poll_interval_ms have no descriptions anywhere, and the description never compensates. The mention of 'inspire music' loosely hints that audio_urls guide generation but adds no format, count, or model-selection meaning beyond the schema.

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

Purpose3/5

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

States a specific verb (Create) and names the backing service (Suno task on RunAPI), plus what is returned (task id, status, output URLs). However, 'inspire music' merely echoes the tool name and never explains that the operation generates new music guided by input audio, so with ~20 sibling music-generation tools (text_to_music, cover_audio, extend_music) an agent cannot tell what distinguishes this one.

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?

No indication of when to use this tool versus text_to_music, cover_audio, extend_music, or any other sibling. No prerequisites, no note that it is async or that it requires audio inputs (only inferable from the schema).

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