Read a track's volume, pan, mute, solo, and named return sends in Ableton Live using its track ID from list_tracks. Use it to inspect mixer settings before making changes.
Read bounded track volume, pan, mute, solo, and named return sends.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| trackId | Yes | ID from list_tracks. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.1Output schema / additionalPropertiesRemoved value: -trueOutput schema / anyOfAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "properties": {
+ "mute": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "pan": {
+ "properties": {
+ "automationState": {
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "decibels": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ]
+ },
+ "displayValue": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ]
+ },
+ "enabled": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "max": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "min": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "silent": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "value": {
+ "type": "number"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "value"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "sends": {
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "decibels": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ]
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "returnTrackId": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "silent": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "value": {
+ "type": "number"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "id",
+ "value"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "solo": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "stateVersion": {
+ "minimum": 1,
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ "trackId": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "volume": {
+ "properties": {
+ "automationState": {
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "decibels": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ]
+ },
+ "displayValue": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ]
+ },
+ "enabled": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "max": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "min": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "silent": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "value": {
+ "type": "number"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "value"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "stateVersion",
+ "trackId",
+ "volume"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ {
+ "properties": {
+ "error": {
+ "properties": {
+ "message": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "outcome": {
+ "enum": [
+ "unknown",
+ "not_executed"
+ ]
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "message",
+ "outcome"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "error"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ }
+]v0.3.0Input schema / properties / trackId / descriptionPrevious value: -"Stable track ID returned by list_tracks."New value: +"ID from list_tracks."Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "additionalProperties": true,
+ "type": "object"
+}v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds only the scope of values returned, consistent with annotations, but does not explain what 'bounded' means or whether sends include post/pre-fader detail. No contradiction with annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single front-loaded sentence that enumerates the relevant fields with no wasted clauses. The only weakness is the ambiguous word 'bounded', which costs clarity for a word that may not be needed.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With an output schema present, the description need not explain return values, and annotations cover safety. For a one-parameter read tool it is nearly sufficient, though a brief note on units (dB) or on what 'named return sends' look like in the response would close the gap.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Only one parameter (trackId), and the schema documents it fully at 100% coverage with a pointer to list_tracks. The description adds nothing about the identifier beyond what the schema states, so baseline 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb ('Read') and the exact resource fields (volume, pan, mute, solo, return sends) scoped to a track. An agent can distinguish it from set_track_mixer by the read verb, though the modifier 'bounded' is unexplained and it doesn't explicitly differentiate from get_set_mixer or get_mixer_panning_context.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this versus the several adjacent mixer-read siblings (get_set_mixer, get_mixer_panning_context, get_track_signal_activity), nor any stated preconditions. Usage must be inferred entirely from the name and description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.