Skip to main content
Glama
runapi-ai

suno-mcp

by runapi-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

visualize_music

Create a Suno task on RunAPI to generate a video visualization from an audio ID. Returns task ID, status, and output URLs.

Instructions

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

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
waitNoPoll until the task reaches a terminal status.
authorNoAuthor name shown in the video. Declared type: string.
timeout_msNo
domain_nameNoDomain name watermark. Declared type: string.
callback_urlNoWebhook URL for async notifications. Declared type: string.
source_task_idNoRunAPI Task id that produced the audio. Required when the audio id alone does not identify the source. Declared type: string.
source_audio_idYesAudio id within the source Task, or a RunAPI audio resource id returned by a previous request. 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 / author / description
      Previous value: -"Author name shown in the video."New value: +"Author name shown in the video. 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."
    • changedInput schema / properties / domain_name / description
      Previous value: -"Domain name watermark."New value: +"Domain name watermark. Declared type: string."
    • changedInput schema / properties / source_audio_id / description
      Previous value: -"Audio id within the source Task, or a RunAPI audio resource id returned by a previous request."New value: +"Audio id within the source Task, or a RunAPI audio resource id returned by a previous request. Declared type: string."
    • changedInput schema / properties / source_task_id / description
      Previous value: -"RunAPI Task id that produced the audio. Required when the audio id alone does not identify the source."New value: +"RunAPI Task id that produced the audio. Required when the audio id alone does not identify the source. Declared type: string."
  2. Addedv0.3.6

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
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 correctly signals an async task model by saying it returns a task id and status, but it omits cost/credit implications, whether the operation is idempotent or destructive, and how the wait/callback mechanisms interact. For an 8-parameter async generation tool this is thin.

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 compact sentences with the action front-loaded and no filler. Minor redundancy in 'on RunAPI (visualize music)', but overall efficient.

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?

With 8 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description should explain the async lifecycle and the source_audio_id/source_task_id pairing. It partially compensates by naming return fields (task id, status, output URLs), but leaves too much of the calling contract implicit.

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 the schema documents most parameters itself. The description adds nothing beyond the schema about wait, timeout_ms, poll_interval_ms, callback_url, or the source_task_id/source_audio_id relationship, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 verb ('Create') and names the operation ('visualize music') plus the provider (Suno on RunAPI), but 'visualize music' is opaque about what actually gets produced — a music video from source audio? The description does not differentiate this from siblings like cover_audio, remaster_audio, or text_to_music.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no statement of prerequisites (e.g., that a source_audio_id from a prior task is required), and no mention of alternatives among the ~20 sibling music tools. The agent must infer placement from the name alone.

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