Skip to main content
Glama
cavi-ai

ableton-mcp

by cavi-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

get_session_arrangement_recording

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read a retained Session-to-Arrangement recording or list handles after reconnect. Omit the ID to inspect current controls, native barPosition, and Arrangement clip metadata for preparation.

Instructions

Read a retained Session-to-Arrangement recording or list handles after reconnect. Without an ID also reads current controls, native barPosition and all Arrangement clip metadata, up to 8192 clips, with appendAfterBeats for preparation. Reports native recording/stop observations, captured clip metadata, preservation limits and inspection errors. Runtime handles are not saved in the Set. No focus or playback changes; all profile.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
recordingIdNoRuntime recording ID; omit to list handles and preparation context.

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": {
+      "cleanupErrors": {
+        "items": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "type": "array"
+      },
+      "clipId": {
+        "anyOf": [
+          {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          {
+            "type": "null"
+          }
+        ]
+      },
+      "clips": {
+        "items": {
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        "type": "array"
+      },
+      "deviceId": {
+        "anyOf": [
+          {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          {
+            "type": "null"
+          }
+        ]
+      },
+      "identityToken": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "reason": {
+        "anyOf": [
+          {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          {
+            "type": "null"
+          }
+        ]
+      },
+      "recordingId": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "recordings": {
+        "items": {
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        "type": "array"
+      },
+      "setFingerprint": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "stateVersion": {
+        "minimum": 1,
+        "type": "integer"
+      },
+      "status": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "supported": {
+        "type": "boolean"
+      },
+      "trackId": {
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "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 establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior. The description adds useful context beyond that: 8192-clip limit, appendAfterBeats preparation, reported preservation limits and inspection errors, runtime handles not saved in the Set, and no focus or playback changes. 'All profile' is vague, but the overall behavioral disclosure is strong.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the main action and then layers in behavioral details efficiently. It is slightly dense and ends with the unclear phrase 'all profile', but most sentences earn their place and there is no redundant filler.

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?

Given a single optional parameter, rich annotations, and an existing output schema, the description provides sufficient context for correct invocation. It explains the ID-omission behavior, clip limits, preservation reporting, and absence of side effects, though the meaning of 'all profile' remains opaque.

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 100%, so the parameter is already documented. The description adds meaning by explaining the two modes: providing a recordingId reads a retained recording, while omitting it lists handles and also reads current controls, barPosition, and Arrangement clip metadata. That goes beyond the schema's brief parameter note.

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 uses a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('retained Session-to-Arrangement recording'), and it clearly describes the dual list/read behavior. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from related siblings like record_session_arrangement or finish_session_arrangement_recording, but the purpose is unambiguous without opening the schema.

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 when to use the tool ('after reconnect', 'for preparation') and explains the effect of omitting the ID, but it never states when to choose this tool over sibling inspection tools such as get_arrangement_take. The guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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