Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
LiveSession MCP

LiveSession MCP

by Uri-Rosen
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

set_track_color

Assigns a track's color using an Ableton Live palette index (0–69), letting AI clients color-code tracks for clearer arrangement and mixing workflows.

Instructions

Set a track's colour by Live palette index (0-69).

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>",
      "color_index": "<color_index>"
    },
    "name": "set_track_color"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
track_typeNotrack
color_indexYes
track_indexYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description contributes the useful behavioral constraint that the index is bounded 0-69, but says nothing about what happens on an out-of-range index, whether the change is undoable, or whether track_type changes behaviour.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the key constraint in parentheses and zero filler. Nothing is repeated from the annotations or schema.

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

Completeness3/5

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 needn't be explained, and the mutation is simple. However, with 0% schema description coverage, the unexplained track_type parameter and the absence of any usage framing leave real gaps for a three-parameter mutation tool.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It clarifies color_index's range (0-69), which is genuinely valuable, but leaves track_index completely unexplained and never mentions the optional track_type parameter whose default is 'track' and whose alternative values are unknown.

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?

Specific verb+resource ("Set a track's colour") with the added, non-obvious detail that the colour is a Live palette index in the range 0-69. It implicitly separates itself from set_clip_color by naming 'track', but never explicitly acknowledges that sibling.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of when a caller should reach for set_clip_color or set_track_name instead. The agent must infer usage entirely from the verb.

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