Ardour Ultra MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

create_send

Create an internal auxiliary send from a track to a bus while rejecting routing feedback cycles. Use it to route audio safely in an Ardour session.

Instructions

Create an internal aux send to a bus; reject routing feedback cycles.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "request": "<request>"
    },
    "name": "create_send"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`request`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	No
`error`	No
`success`	No
`warnings`	No
`revision_after`	No
`changed_objects`	No
`revision_before`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 9, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the mutation profile is covered. The description adds real value by disclosing a validation behavior — routing feedback cycles are rejected — but says nothing about the non-idempotent nature, revision conflicts, or what a rejected cycle does to partially applied state.

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?

A single compact sentence with the core action front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though the terseness comes at the cost of the parameter and usage information the tool needs.

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 output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, but for a non-idempotent mutation with a nested six-field request object and 0% schema coverage, the description leaves requirement-critical fields and preconditions unstated. It is not adequate for this complexity.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, and it does not. The nested request object exposes track_id, target_id, gain_db (default -6), dry_run, confirm_delete and expected_revision, none of which the description explains — notably expected_revision and confirm_delete, whose semantics are not self-evident.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Create an internal aux send to a bus', which clearly separates it from siblings like remove_send and set_send_gain. It stops short of naming an alternative, but the action and object are unambiguous.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g. that the target bus must exist, cf. ensure_bus), and no statement of when not to use it. The only conditional content is the failure case about feedback cycles, not usage selection.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server