Skip to main content
Glama
cavi-ai

ableton-mcp

by cavi-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

get_track_grouping_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect a retained grouping handle from a group_tracks plan to resolve Group/member IDs, hierarchy, exposed material, and controls. Read-only; does not regroup or restore tracks.

Instructions

Inspect a retained native grouping handle from a group_tracks plan, including after a lost reply. Resolves actual Group/member IDs, hierarchy, exposed material and controls. Read-only; does not repeat grouping or restore anything. Runtime handles can expire or disappear after bridge reload; missing handles require current-track inspection. All profile.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
groupingIdYesRetained groupingId from the plan or result.

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": {
+      "groupVerified": {
+        "type": "boolean"
+      },
+      "groupingId": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "inspectionRequired": {
+        "type": "boolean"
+      },
+      "members": {
+        "items": {
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        "type": "array"
+      },
+      "stateVersion": {
+        "minimum": 1,
+        "type": "integer"
+      },
+      "status": {
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "stateVersion",
+      "groupingId",
+      "status",
+      "members",
+      "groupVerified",
+      "inspectionRequired"
+    ],
+    "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 readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/destructiveHint, but the description adds real context beyond them: handles can expire or disappear after a bridge reload and missing handles must fall back to current-track inspection. It also clarifies the negative space ("does not repeat grouping or restore anything"), useful for a status tool that could be mistaken for an action.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose in sentence one, and most sentences carry information. However it is dense internal jargon and the trailing "All profile" is unexplained, slightly undermining clarity without adding obvious value.

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 restated, and annotations cover the safety profile; the description supplies the missing behavioral nuance (expiry, fallback, non-restorative nature). Complete enough to call correctly, with only minor ambiguity.

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 the single groupingId parameter is already documented as "Retained groupingId from the plan or result." The description echoes that origin but adds no format, validity or expiry detail beyond the schema, 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 (Inspect) and resource (retained native grouping handle) and ties it to its origin, the group_tracks plan, so the agent knows it is a read of a prior grouping operation. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the analogous sibling get_track_ungrouping_status, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

"including after a lost reply" signals when the tool is worth calling, and "missing handles require current-track inspection" tells the agent what to do when the handle is dead. It never names an alternative tool or a hard when-not-to-use, so it stops short of 5.

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