Skip to main content
Glama
cavi-ai

ableton-mcp

by cavi-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

get_rack_performance_context

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a snapshot of a rack's performance context, including visible macros, mapped parameters, ranges, current values, automation, and variation count/index.

Instructions

Read one native snapshot of visible rack macros, exact mapped descendant parameters, ranges, current values, automation and variation count/index. Unresolved mappings and unknown layouts are explicit. Saved variation contents and audible results are unavailable.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
trackIdYestrack-N from list_tracks, return-N from get_set_mixer, or master.
deviceIdYesID from list_devices.

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: +[
+  {
+    "properties": {
+      "chains": {
+        "items": {
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        "type": "array"
+      },
+      "clipId": {
+        "anyOf": [
+          {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          {
+            "type": "null"
+          }
+        ]
+      },
+      "device": {
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "deviceId": {
+        "anyOf": [
+          {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          {
+            "type": "null"
+          }
+        ]
+      },
+      "identityToken": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "macros": {
+        "items": {
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        "type": "array"
+      },
+      "reason": {
+        "anyOf": [
+          {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          {
+            "type": "null"
+          }
+        ]
+      },
+      "setFingerprint": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "stateVersion": {
+        "minimum": 1,
+        "type": "integer"
+      },
+      "status": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "supported": {
+        "type": "boolean"
+      },
+      "trackId": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "variations": {
+        "type": "object"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "stateVersion"
+    ],
+    "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

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the description is free to add semantics, which it does: unresolved mappings and unknown layouts are reported explicitly, and it declares the boundaries (variation contents and audible results unavailable). These are useful behavioral disclosures beyond the structured hints, though return shape detail is left to the output schema.

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?

Two dense sentences with the read verb and scope front-loaded, followed by boundary conditions. No filler; every clause carries information.

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 a 2-param schema at full coverage, an output schema present, and read-only annotations, the description only needs to frame scope and boundaries, which it does. It is essentially complete for an agent to call correctly, with minor room for explicit when-to-use guidance.

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 description coverage is 100% and the two required params (trackId, deviceId) are documented with precise accepted value forms in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read one native snapshot of visible rack macros, exact mapped descendant parameters, ranges, current values, automation and variation count/index'). An agent can tell it reads rack macro state rather than mutating it, though it does not name rack siblings such as recall_rack_macro_variation directly.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: it is the read-side companion to the rack macro mapping/variation tools, and the 'Saved variation contents ... unavailable' line hints at what it cannot do. However, there is no explicit when-to-use trigger or named alternative, leaving routing to inference.

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