Ardour Ultra MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

delete_group

Destructive

Delete a nonempty group without removing its routes, with explicit confirmation required; empty groups are not supported by this binding.

Instructions

Remove a nonempty group without deleting its routes; explicit intent; Ardour cannot remove empty groups through this binding.

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": "delete_group"
  }
}

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

B3.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark this as destructive and non-idempotent, so the description's main added value is that removing the group does not delete its routes. It also discloses the important Ardour limitation around empty groups. It stops short of explaining the confirmation or dry-run behavior implied by the schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short and front-loads the core action, which is good. However, fragments like 'explicit intent' and 'through this binding' are cryptic and reduce clarity without adding precise guidance.

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?

The description covers the central destructive behavior and route-preservation guarantee, but for a destructive mutation with 0% schema description coverage it leaves important safety controls unexplained. Dry-run, confirmation, revision checking, and the exact request structure are all undocumented, so an agent cannot confidently invoke the tool from the description alone.

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%, and the description does not explain any of the nested request fields: group_id, dry_run, confirm_delete, or expected_revision. The phrase 'explicit intent' may hint at confirmation, but it is too vague to substitute for parameter documentation. With one required structured parameter and no schema descriptions, this is a significant gap.

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 clearly states a specific verb and resource: remove a group. It adds a key qualifier, 'nonempty group without deleting its routes,' which helps distinguish this from group-creation or route-deletion operations. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives, but the purpose is unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives a scope restriction: it applies to nonempty groups and explicitly notes that empty groups cannot be removed through this binding. However, it does not explain when to use this instead of related group tools, nor does it clarify what 'explicit intent' requires in practice.

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

Deploy Server