Skip to main content
Glama
cavi-ai

ableton-mcp

by cavi-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

get_producer_workflow

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find producer workflow references by keyword, list available workflows, or retrieve one exact workflow with named arguments. Use it to look up guidance without calling Ableton Live or executing work.

Instructions

Find workflow references by optional keyword query (default 5 results, maximum 20), list all, or retrieve one exact workflow with named string arguments. Search matches metadata words/prefixes and may return partial matches. Does not call Live or execute work. Available in all and producer profiles.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoSearch result limit; requires query.
queryNoSearch names, descriptions and argument descriptions; omit workflow and arguments.
workflowNo
argumentsNoNamed prompt arguments from listing, such as request, mode or setPath.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.3.1
    • removedOutput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -true
    • addedOutput schema / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "anyOf": [
+      {
+        "properties": {
+          "workflows": {
+            "items": {
+              "type": "object"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "workflows"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      {
+        "properties": {
+          "description": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "messages": {
+            "items": {
+              "type": "object"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          },
+          "workflow": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "workflow",
+          "description",
+          "messages"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      }
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  {
+    "properties": {
+      "error": {
+        "properties": {
+          "message": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "outcome": {
+            "enum": [
+              "unknown",
+              "not_executed"
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "message",
+          "outcome"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "error"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  }
+]
  2. Addedv0.3.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior, so the description is not carrying the safety burden. It still adds real value beyond them: 'Does not call Live or execute work' clarifies that workflows are references, not executions, and 'Available in all and producer profiles' plus 'Search matches metadata words/prefixes and may return partial matches' disclose availability and result-fuzziness that annotations do not cover.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then mode detail, then behavioral caveats and availability. It is dense but each clause contributes (modes, limits, matching semantics, non-execution, profile availability); the sentence is long and slightly run-on but no filler is present.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value description is not required, and the definition covers the remaining decision points: which mode, the limit bounds, that search is fuzzy, and that this is a pure lookup with no Live call. The only soft spot is the arguments object, where the agent must infer from 'named string arguments' and the schema's 'from listing' note that a listing call is the prerequisite.

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?

Schema coverage is 75%, and the description compensates meaningfully: it gives the default result count (5) and ceiling (20) for limit, which the schema states only as a maximum, and it explains that query hits metadata words and prefixes with possible partial matches, which shapes how an agent interprets results. It adds little on the nested arguments object beyond the schema's own 'named prompt arguments from listing' note, but overall it goes beyond structured data.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource ('Find workflow references') and enumerates the three operating modes: keyword search, list all, and exact retrieval by name. It does not name any sibling tool, so an agent must infer that this is distinct from tools like list_producer_chain_blueprints or get_producer_chain_blueprint, but the resource itself is unambiguous.

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?

It clearly implies the mode-selection rule: supply a query to search (default 5, max 20), omit it to list everything, or name a workflow plus arguments to retrieve one exact entry. What is missing is any explicit exclusion or pointer to an alternative tool for adjacent needs, so the routing guidance is strong internally but silent about siblings.

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