Skip to main content
Glama
runapi-ai

suno-mcp

by runapi-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

remaster_audio

Remaster an existing Suno audio track from its source task ID and audio ID, returning a task id, status, and output URLs for the new version.

Instructions

Create a Suno task on RunAPI (remaster audio). 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_idYesAudio ID within the source task. Declared type: string.
timeout_msNo
callback_urlNoWebhook URL for async notifications. Declared type: string.
source_task_idYesCompleted Suno music task ID; any model version and any channel is accepted as the source. Declared type: string.
poll_interval_msNo
variation_categoryNoHow far the remaster may drift from the original. Applies to suno-v5 and suno-v5.5 targets; defaults to normal. Declared type: string. Known values: "subtle", "normal", "high".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changedv0.4.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +{}
    • changedInput schema / properties / audio_id / description
      Previous value: -"Audio ID within the source task."New value: +"Audio ID within the source task. Declared type: string."
    • 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"
-]
    • changedInput schema / properties / source_task_id / description
      Previous value: -"Completed source task ID."New value: +"Completed Suno music task ID; any model version and any channel is accepted as the source. Declared type: string."
    • addedInput schema / properties / variation_category
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "How far the remaster may drift from the original. Applies to suno-v5 and suno-v5.5 targets; defaults to normal. Declared type: string. Known values: \"subtle\", \"normal\", \"high\".",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Addedv0.3.2

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
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 response shape (task id, status, output URLs), which is useful, but says nothing about the asynchronous task lifecycle implied by the 'wait' flag, polling defaults, timeouts, cost, or failure behavior for a mutation-style operation.

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 short, front-loaded sentences with zero filler. It is efficient, though the brevity comes at the cost of substantive guidance rather than being an example of tight writing about a complex tool.

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?

An 8-parameter task-creation tool with no annotations and no output schema deserves more: async/polling behavior, timeout semantics, cost implications, and any source-task requirements are all absent. The description covers only the return fields.

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 description coverage is 75%, so most parameters are documented in the schema itself, and the description adds no parameter-level detail. Baseline 3 applies for a schema that largely does the heavy lifting.

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 states a specific verb and resource: create a remaster task on RunAPI for audio. 'Remaster' distinguishes it from siblings like convert_audio, cover_audio, and extend_music, though it never explicitly contrasts with them or with boost_style.

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 when-to-use guidance is given. It never explains when remastering is preferable to convert_audio, cover_audio, or extend_music, nor does it mention preconditions such as the source task needing to be completed (that detail lives only in 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