Ardour Ultra MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

list_sends

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a track's sends with stable processor and target route IDs to inspect routing and support reliable edits in an Ardour session.

Instructions

List sends with stable processor and target route IDs.

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": "list_sends"
  }
}

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

C2.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds only the vague claim about "stable" IDs and says nothing about pagination behavior or whether the request object scopes results to a single track.

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?

It is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is structurally sound. The brevity is only a problem in that the content itself is uninformative, not that the sentence is bloated.

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 not be explained, but the definition leaves critical gaps: it never states that results are scoped by track_id, ignores pagination semantics, and does not explain the presence of confirm_delete/expected_revision fields on a read-only listing tool. For a tool whose request wrapper carries seven undocumented fields, this is under-specified.

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 every field of the nested request object (limit, offset, dry_run, track_id, name_filter, confirm_delete, expected_revision) is undocumented. The description does not compensate at all — it never explains that track_id is required, what name_filter matches, or what dry_run means for a read tool.

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?

The verb+resource pair "List sends" is clear, but the qualifier "with stable processor and target route IDs" is opaque jargon that does not tell an agent what a send row contains or how this differs from create_send. No sibling is named or contrasted, so the agent must infer that this is the read-side counterpart.

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?

The description contains no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of create_send or ensure_bus as alternatives. The only usable signal is the verb "List", which an agent gets 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