Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
LiveSession MCP

LiveSession MCP

by Uri-Rosen
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

save_mix_snapshot

Saves every track's mixer state and exposed device parameter values under a name so you can A/B compare mix versions.

Instructions

Save every track's mixer state and exposed device parameter values under a name (A/B compare).

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "save_mix_snapshot"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, closed-world write, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds what state is captured and that the snapshot is keyed by a name, but is silent on the key behavioral question for a named save: whether an existing snapshot with the same name is overwritten or an error is returned.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

One sentence, front-loaded with the action and scope, with no redundant or filler wording. Everything stated earns its place.

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?

A single-parameter tool with an output schema, so return values need no explanation. The description covers what is saved and why, leaving only overwrite/duplicate-name semantics and whether returns/sends are included unaddressed.

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

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With a single parameter at 0% schema description coverage, the schema supplies only 'Name: string'. The description compensates by explaining the name is the label under which the snapshot is stored and later identified for A/B comparison, giving the parameter real meaning beyond its type.

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?

States a specific verb (save) and resource (mix snapshot) plus exactly what is captured: every track's mixer state and exposed device parameter values. It is clearly distinguishable from list_mix_snapshots and restore_mix_snapshot, though it never names those siblings to reinforce the distinction.

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 parenthetical '(A/B compare)' hints at the motivating workflow, implying this is used to capture a reference state before making changes. There is no explicit when-to-use vs when-not-to-use guidance and no mention of the restore counterpart needed to complete the A/B flow.

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