Skip to main content
Glama
cavi-ai

ableton-mcp

by cavi-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

inspect_producer_return_bus

Read-onlyIdempotent

Reads an Ableton Return bus to verify ordered FX, child sources, sends, and Sends Only routing against a layered blueprint; optionally checks a chosen synth plugin identity.

Instructions

Read an existing Return bus, ordered FX, child sources, sends and Sends Only routing against a layered blueprint. Optional pluginId selects an explicitly chosen Serum 2, Omnisphere or VPS Avenger instead of the blueprint's factory instrument; this verifies loaded identity, not preset or sound.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
targetYes
childrenYesOne track for each blueprint child role.
returnTrackIdYesExact Return Track ID.

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": {
+      "busChain": {
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "children": {
+        "items": {
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        "type": "array"
+      },
+      "limitation": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "matchesBlueprint": {
+        "type": "boolean"
+      },
+      "returnTrackId": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "stateVersion": {
+        "minimum": 1,
+        "type": "integer"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "stateVersion",
+      "returnTrackId",
+      "busChain",
+      "children",
+      "matchesBlueprint",
+      "limitation"
+    ],
+    "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 / children / items / 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. Addedv0.2.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, and the description adds useful scope: it inspects ordered FX, child sources, sends, and Sends Only routing. It also explicitly limits pluginId verification to loaded identity rather than preset or sound, which is valuable behavioral context.

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 compact and front-loads the core read operation before clarifying the optional pluginId behavior. Both sentences carry useful information, though the second is dense and could be slightly easier to scan.

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 the output schema and read-only annotations, the description supplies the essential inspection scope and the key plugin identity caveat. It is complete enough for invocation, with only minor gaps around prerequisite explanation and explicit sibling routing.

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 67%, with descriptions already supplied for returnTrackId, children, role, and trackId. The description adds meaningful semantics for pluginId by explaining its instrument-selection and identity-verification behavior, but it does not explain the target enum or clarify the required children structure beyond what the schema provides.

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 names a specific read operation on a Return bus and enumerates the inspected elements: ordered FX, child sources, sends, and Sends Only routing against a layered blueprint. It is clearly distinguishable from general producer inspection, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with inspect_producer_bus or inspect_producer_chain.

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 by 'Read an existing Return bus' and by the optional pluginId explanation, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to sibling inspection tools. An agent can infer this is for blueprint verification, but the routing between alternatives is not stated.

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