Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
LiveSession MCP

LiveSession MCP

by Uri-Rosen
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

delete_locator

Destructive

Removes a locator at a specified beat position in an Ableton Live Set so you can clean up arrangement markers without manual editing.

Instructions

Delete the locator at a beat.

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": {
      "time_beats": "<time_beats>"
    },
    "name": "delete_locator"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
time_beatsYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds almost nothing beyond that: it does not say what happens if no locator exists at that beat, whether the deletion is undoable, or whether the match must be exact.

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?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Its brevity is not the problem; the missing information is, so it scores well on structure but the terseness leaves gaps.

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 for a destructive single-parameter tool the definition is still thin: the beat-matching semantics and the no-match/error behavior are the two things an agent most needs, and both are absent.

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 carries the burden for the single parameter, yet 'at a beat' merely restates the parameter name 'time_beats'. It gives no information on whether this is an exact position match, a tolerance, or a locator index.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Delete the locator') plus a scoping cue ('at a beat'). It is clear what the tool does, but it never distinguishes itself from siblings like set_locator, get_locators, or create_locator, so it stops short of a 5.

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 when-to-use guidance, no statement of prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as get_locators to find a beat or set_locator to move a locator. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools