Plays multiple MIDI notes simultaneously on the live port as one chord, then releases them together. Use it to trigger chords, pads, or stacked sounds in Cakewalk SONAR.
Play several notes at once on the live MIDI port, released together.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| channel | No | ||
| pitches | Yes | ||
| velocity | No | ||
| durationMs | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that notes sound on the live MIDI port and are released together (simultaneous note-off), but says nothing about permissions, whether the call blocks for the duration, failure modes, or what happens on an unavailable port.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single tight sentence with the operation and its key behavioral trait front-loaded; nothing wasted and no filler.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
A four-parameter mutation-style tool with no annotations, no output schema, and zero parameter documentation in the schema. The description should give more: defaults, timing behavior, and error conditions are all absent.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0% across four parameters. The description only hints at the pitches array and that all notes share a single release (durationMs), leaving channel and velocity entirely undocumented by either source.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description names a specific verb and resource (play notes on the live MIDI port) and its scope (several notes at once, released together), which implicitly separates it from the single-note sibling cw_midi_note. It stops short of naming that sibling outright, so differentiation is inferable rather than explicit.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
"Play several notes at once" versus a single-note tool implies when to choose this one, and "live MIDI port" signals real-time output rather than file writing (cw_write_midi_file). However, no explicit when/when-not guidance or named alternative is given, so the agent must infer the routing.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.