Overview, Analysis, and Opinion

Brief Summary

music box don't fuck with my kids

Overall Thoughts

This is not very well written. You have numerous run-on sentences that also read very awkwardly due to your phrasing, at least three it's/its mix-up, and several bad redactions. Moreover, you didn't actually make something interesting. In fact, I'm not sure what this does because you never actually said what its effect is in the Description. Either way, it's boring and cliche.

Verdict

Downvote.

Suggestions

• Learn the difference between it's/its. Work on your run-on sentences. Work on nonawkward wording.
• Read this essay about redaction/expungement.
• In the future, please put the description of the anomalous effects after the physical description but before the history logs. For this draft, however, I seriously think you need to work on your basic writing skills before really trying to make a skip.

Specific Details/Line-by-Line

Special Containment Procedures

SCP-XXXX-1 is not to be removed under any circumstances (See addendum XXXX-B) except during authorized lab testing supervised by at least one research specialist with security clearance 2 or higher.

I would suggest taking out the "under any circumstances" part, as it is offset by the exception. Also, I would personally say "personnel with Level 2 clearance or higher," but that's probably just my preference.

D-Class test subjects may be used, although with some restrictions (See addendum XXXX-C).

Those restrictions, whatever they may be, should probably be included in the containment procedures.

Description

SCP-XXXX is a key-wound music box of unknown origins, it is made from wood similar to Rowan, but all DNA testing done on wood samples points toward an unidentified subspecies.

This reads as a run-on sentence and should really be split into at least two separate sentences.

There is a gold band with floral pressings wrapping around the center of the box, with an inscription in [REDACTED] translating to "Be not afraid child, the Shadows shall protect you."

What's the point of redacting the text if you're just gonna go ahead and translate it anyway?

keyhole on the front into which SCP-XXXX-1 fits.
SCP-XXXX-1 is the matching key to SCP-XXXX and is a small gold key with a heart shaped

You need a full break between these paragraphs (i.e. a line with no text).

SCP-XXXX-1 is the matching key to SCP-XXXX and is a small gold key with a heart shaped head, the key itself has no anamolous effect without the music box and seems to simply be an activator.

Again, split this into two different sentences.

Object discovered during a routine sweep of reported hauntings

This just is not proper grammar. Also, it's better to actually describe the anomalous effects of the object before detailing its history.

Object discovered during a routine sweep of reported hauntings

*abused

leading the team to recognize it's potential anomolous nature.

This is an it's/its mix-up. "It's" is a contraction of "it is," whereas "its" denotes possession.

Upon contact with SCP-XXXX all members of the team reported sudden movement in the shadows of the room, accompanied by whispers and children's laughter, after a few moments the activity ceased and the object was brought in for further study, interestingly the entire house collapsed when SCP-XXXX was removed from the property.

This is an enormously long, run-on sentence that needs to be broken down. Additionally, using words like "interestingly" inserts authorial opinion into the document, which wouldn't happen in something like this. Also, this doesn't actually tell us what the anomalous effect is. Certainly, it's demonstrated, but you need to be absolutely clear what the object can do in the Description before any history or discovery logs. Simply telling about what happened once is not enough.

Addenda

Dr. M█████ left the room briefly to deal with a containment issue of a more dangerous SCP

Why? Is he also a security agent? Was this, like, a site destroying SCP that would require him evacuating? If not… why the hell'd he leave?

This prompted an update from Safe classification to Euclid

Why?

Any and all class D personnel assigned to SCP-XXXX must not have any history of violence against children, upon entry of a D Class test subject (Caucasian, 35) who had previously [Redacted] no fewer than 7 [seven] children before his arrest the SCP began playing on it's own as was expected, as he approached it the researcher reports seeing 10 [ten] child sized humanoid shadows surround the subject, and one adult sized humanoid shadow in the shape of a woman in an ornate dress appearing a short distance in front of him.

Look at how long this sentence is. Please, please, please, break it up and make it smoother. Furthermore, I can think of no actual reason why what he did would be redacted. Okay, maybe he's a child molester. Maybe he's a toddler strangler. Maybe he took candy from a baby. He's a bad dude, yeah, we know. So what? Why would the Foundation hide this potentially useful information? Furthermore, the items typically aren't called "SCPs" in the context of the in-universe Foundation.

the smaller apparitions then [REDACTED] the body and each vanished leaving no trace other than the mangled body with a keyhole shaped wound and a missing heart.

Again, no real reason to redact this.