Revert your last action in Ableton Live to fix mistakes or experiment freely.
Undo the last action in Ableton.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "undo"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the tool undoes the last action, but lacks details on what exactly happens (e.g., whether it undoes only one step, what occurs if no actions to undo, or side effects on other states).
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?
The description is a single sentence that is extremely concise and front-loaded. Every word is necessary; no redundant information is present.
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?
Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema) and the context of Ableton, the description is largely complete. However, it could benefit from clarifying scope (e.g., global undo vs track-specific) or limitations, but the current description suffices for basic usage.
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?
The tool has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (no param info needed). According to guidelines, baseline for 0 params is 4. The description does not add param info, which is acceptable given no parameters exist.
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 is a concise verb+resource statement: 'Undo the last action in Ableton.' It clearly states the action (undo) and the context (the last action in Ableton), distinguishing it from all sibling tools, which cover various other operations.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use undo versus alternatives, such as redo or reverting specific changes. The description does not mention any prerequisites, limitations (e.g., undo history depth), or when not to use this tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.