Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
cavi-ai

ableton-mcp

by cavi-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

get_track_arm_context

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read exact native track arm capability, input, all arm states and recording readiness without changing focus or controls. Explains refusals; all profile.

Instructions

Read exact native track arm capability, input, all arm states and recording readiness without changing focus or controls. Explains refusals; all profile.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
trackIdYesID from list_tracks.

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": {
+      "armStates": {
+        "items": {
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        "type": "array"
+      },
+      "clipId": {
+        "anyOf": [
+          {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          {
+            "type": "null"
+          }
+        ]
+      },
+      "deviceId": {
+        "anyOf": [
+          {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          {
+            "type": "null"
+          }
+        ]
+      },
+      "identityToken": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "inputStates": {
+        "items": {
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        "type": "array"
+      },
+      "readyToChange": {
+        "type": "boolean"
+      },
+      "reason": {
+        "anyOf": [
+          {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          {
+            "type": "null"
+          }
+        ]
+      },
+      "reasons": {
+        "items": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "type": "array"
+      },
+      "setFingerprint": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "stateVersion": {
+        "minimum": 1,
+        "type": "integer"
+      },
+      "status": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "supported": {
+        "type": "boolean"
+      },
+      "target": {
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "trackId": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "transport": {
+        "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

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds real value beyond them: it explicitly promises no focus or control changes and that it 'explains refusals' (i.e., surfaces reasons arm attempts would fail). That is meaningful behavioral context not present in structured fields.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action. The trailing 'all profile' fragment is vague and slightly undermines clarity, but overall there is minimal waste.

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 values need not be explained; the description covers scope, side-effect profile and refusal explanation. Adequate for a single-parameter read tool, though the meaning of the 'profile' portion is left unclear.

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?

Only one parameter (trackId) and schema coverage is 100% with its own description pointing to list_tracks. The description adds no further semantics about the ID, 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+resource: reads native track arm capability, input, arm states and recording readiness for a track. Clearly distinguishable from the mutating sibling arm_track, though the phrasing 'all profile' is opaque.

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?

The phrase 'without changing focus or controls' implies this is a non-mutating inspection step before arming, but it never explicitly says when to call this vs arm_track or get_transport_recording_context. Usage is only implied.

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