Skip to main content
Glama
cavi-ai

ableton-mcp

by cavi-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

get_clip_groove_context

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a clip's exact track, MIDI, timing, Groove Pool, and global musical context for before/after validation of UI extraction and baking without executing it.

Instructions

Read one native callback snapshot of exact clip/track names, MIDI note IDs and expression metadata or audio state, clip timing, complete Groove Pool and global musical context. Supports before/after validation of UI-only extraction and baking; does not execute them.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
clipIdYeslist_clips Session ID or supported list_arrangement_clips ID.
trackIdYesID from list_tracks.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.3.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / clipId / description
      Previous value: -"Session ID from list_clips; Arrangement ID from list_arrangement_clips where supported."New value: +"list_clips Session ID or supported list_arrangement_clips ID."
    • removedOutput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -true
    • addedOutput schema / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "properties": {
+      "clipId": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "musicalContext": {
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "source": {
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "stateVersion": {
+        "minimum": 1,
+        "type": "integer"
+      },
+      "timing": {
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "trackId": {
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "stateVersion",
+      "trackId",
+      "clipId",
+      "source",
+      "timing",
+      "musicalContext"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  {
+    "properties": {
+      "error": {
+        "properties": {
+          "message": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "outcome": {
+            "enum": [
+              "unknown",
+              "not_executed"
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "message",
+          "outcome"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "error"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  }
+]
  2. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.3.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / clipId / description
      Previous value: -"Stable clip ID: track-N:clip-M from list_clips, or track-N:arrangement-clip-M from list_arrangement_clips for tools that support Arrangement clips."New value: +"Session ID from list_clips; Arrangement ID from list_arrangement_clips where supported."
    • changedInput schema / properties / trackId / description
      Previous value: -"Stable track ID returned by list_tracks."New value: +"ID from list_tracks."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the result is 'one native callback snapshot' (a point-in-time capture) and that the tool does not perform baking/extraction, which is meaningful beyond the annotations. It stops short of saying anything about size, cost, or how snapshot staleness behaves.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

It is a single sentence but heavily noun-stacked ('one native callback snapshot of exact clip/track names, MIDI note IDs and expression metadata or audio state, clip timing, complete Groove Pool and global musical context'), which reads as a catalogue rather than a prioritized statement. The genuinely important constraint (read-only, no execution) is buried in a second clause.

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 and fully documented parameters, the description only needs to convey scope and non-mutation, and it does both. The remaining gap is navigational: an agent facing this large library still cannot tell from the description why it would pick this over the nearby postcondition-inspection or timing-read tools.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and both parameters carry their own descriptions pointing at list_clips/list_arrangement_clips and list_tracks. The description adds no further meaning about clipId/trackId semantics, so baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Read') plus a well-scoped resource: a per-clip context snapshot covering names, MIDI note IDs, expression/audio state, clip timing, Groove Pool and global musical context. It is clearly a read tool as opposed to the sibling that inspects postconditions, though it never names that sibling, so the distinction is implicit rather than explicit.

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?

It implies usage ('Supports before/after validation of UI-only extraction and baking') and states a boundary ('does not execute them'), which is useful. But it never names alternatives such as inspect_clip_groove_postconditions, get_clip_timing, or get_midi_clip_notes, nor states when this broad snapshot should be preferred over those narrower reads.

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