Skip to main content
Glama
cavi-ai

ableton-mcp

by cavi-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

get_track_routing

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve exact input, output, and monitoring routing for one track using its ID from list_tracks. Group tracks return null monitoring because Live does not support it.

Instructions

Read exact input, output, and monitoring choices for one track. Group Tracks expose monitoring as null because Live does not support it.

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": {
+      "input": {
+        "properties": {
+          "availableChannels": {
+            "items": {
+              "type": "object"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          },
+          "availableTypes": {
+            "items": {
+              "type": "object"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          },
+          "channel": {
+            "anyOf": [
+              {
+                "type": "object"
+              },
+              {
+                "type": "null"
+              }
+            ]
+          },
+          "type": {
+            "anyOf": [
+              {
+                "type": "object"
+              },
+              {
+                "type": "null"
+              }
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "monitoring": {
+        "anyOf": [
+          {
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          {
+            "type": "null"
+          }
+        ]
+      },
+      "output": {
+        "properties": {
+          "availableChannels": {
+            "items": {
+              "type": "object"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          },
+          "availableTypes": {
+            "items": {
+              "type": "object"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          },
+          "channel": {
+            "anyOf": [
+              {
+                "type": "object"
+              },
+              {
+                "type": "null"
+              }
+            ]
+          },
+          "type": {
+            "anyOf": [
+              {
+                "type": "object"
+              },
+              {
+                "type": "null"
+              }
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "stateVersion": {
+        "minimum": 1,
+        "type": "integer"
+      },
+      "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. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.3.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / trackId / description
      Previous value: -"Stable track ID returned by list_tracks."New value: +"ID from list_tracks."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish that this is a safe, idempotent read operation. The description adds real behavioral value by disclosing that Group Tracks expose monitoring as null because Live does not support it, which prevents misinterpretation of output.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by a relevant exception. No filler or redundancy.

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?

For a simple one-parameter read tool with annotations and an output schema, the description is nearly complete. The only gap is that it does not explicitly distinguish itself from related routing getters/setters.

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?

The schema has 100% description coverage and documents trackId as coming from list_tracks. The description does not add any parameter-level detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('input, output, and monitoring choices for one track'), making the core purpose clear. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from nearby siblings such as get_return_routing, get_track_midi_routing, or set_track_routing, so it falls short of 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 Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied: read routing for a track. The second sentence gives a useful caveat about Group Tracks, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over get_return_routing, get_track_midi_routing, or set_track_routing.

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