Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
LiveSession MCP

LiveSession MCP

by Uri-Rosen
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

duplicate_to_arrangement

Copies a Session-view clip to the Arrangement timeline at a specified beat position on the same track, enabling placement of clip sections into a Live Set arrangement.

Instructions

Copy a Session-view clip into the Arrangement timeline.

Uses Live's track.duplicate_clip_to_arrangement() API (Live 11 / 12). The clip is placed at destination_time beats from the start of the arrangement on the same track it lives in.

Typical workflow:

  1. create_clip / add_notes_to_clip to build a Session clip

  2. Call duplicate_to_arrangement once per bar/section you need

  3. Call switch_to_arrangement_view to confirm the result in Live

Parameters:

  • track_index: Index of the track that owns the Session clip

  • clip_index: Index of the clip slot in that track (Session view)

  • destination_time: Beat position in the arrangement to place the clip (e.g. 0.0 = start, 8.0 = bar 3 in 4/4)

  • user_prompt: The original user prompt that led to this tool call (for telemetry)

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": {
      "track_index": "<track_index>",
      "clip_index": "<clip_index>",
      "destination_time": "<destination_time>"
    },
    "name": "duplicate_to_arrangement"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
clip_indexYes
track_indexYes
user_promptNo
destination_timeYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the mutation/safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), so the description's added value is the placement behavior: the copy lands on the same track at destination_time beats, and the source Session clip is preserved by the word 'Copy'. It does not say what happens if a clip already occupies that arrangement position, which is the main remaining behavioral gap.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded, then API note, then a numbered workflow, then a parameter list — a clear structure with no repetition. The Live 11/12 API sentence is borderline incidental but does convey version compatibility.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema present, return values need no explanation, and all parameters plus the surrounding workflow are documented. The only missing piece for a mutation tool is the collision/overwrite semantics at the destination beat position.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

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 full burden and does so: each of the four parameters is explained, including destination_time with concrete examples (0.0 = start, 8.0 = bar 3 in 4/4) and user_prompt's telemetry purpose. This is meaningfully more than the bare integer/number/string types in the schema.

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 first line gives a precise verb, resource, and direction: a Session-view clip is copied into the Arrangement timeline. That scope distinguishes it from siblings like create_arrangement_clip or duplicate_clip_loop, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The 'Typical workflow' block explicitly places this tool after create_clip/add_notes_to_clip and before switch_to_arrangement_view, giving concrete sequencing guidance. It does not state when to prefer an alternative such as create_arrangement_clip instead, so no exclusions are covered.

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