ableton-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

recall_group_system_snapshot

Destructive

Plan or apply a saved group-track mixer, routing, device, and rack capture to mapped existing Group Tracks and descendants, with dry-run validation and rollback on failure.

Instructions

Plan or apply a saved group-system capture onto one-to-one mapped compatible existing Group Track and descendants. One guarded native callback and Live undo step restore exposed track mixer, routing, device and rack state; on failure the bridge attempts rollback across every changed track. Does not recreate tracks/devices/clips or hidden plugin state.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	Exact saved group-system snapshot name.
`dryRun`	No	False executes with token and hash.
`mapping`	Yes	One explicit source-to-target entry for every saved track.
`planHash`	No	Plan hash.
`busTrackId`	Yes	ID from list_tracks.
`confirmationToken`	No	Single-use plan token.
`expectedStateVersion`	Yes	Observed stateVersion.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.3.1Oct 23, 2026

removedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -true
```

addedOutput schema / anyOf

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "oneOf": [
+      {
+        "properties": {
+          "confirmation": {
+            "properties": {
+              "expiresAt": {
+                "type": "number"
+              },
+              "planHash": {
+                "pattern": "^[a-f0-9]{64}$",
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "token": {
+                "minLength": 1,
+                "type": "string"
+              }
+            },
+            "required": [
+              "token",
+              "planHash",
+              "expiresAt"
+            ],
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "dryRun": {
+            "const": true
+          },
+          "plan": {
+            "type": "object"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "dryRun",
+          "plan",
+          "confirmation"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      {
+        "properties": {
+          "dryRun": {
+            "const": false
+          },
+          "operationOutcome": {
+            "properties": {
+              "evidence": {
+                "items": {
+                  "type": "string"
+                },
+                "type": "array"
+              },
+              "reason": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "schemaVersion": {
+                "const": 1
+              },
+              "status": {
+                "enum": [
+                  "applied",
+                  "outcome_unknown",
+                  "postconditions_failed",
+                  "pending_postconditions",
+                  "pending_user_action"
+                ]
+              }
+            },
+            "required": [
+              "schemaVersion",
+              "status",
+              "reason",
+              "evidence"
+            ],
+            "type": "object"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "dryRun",
+          "operationOutcome"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      }
+    ],
+    "properties": {
+      "dryRun": {
+        "type": "boolean"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "dryRun"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  {
+    "properties": {
+      "error": {
+        "properties": {
+          "message": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "outcome": {
+            "enum": [
+              "unknown",
+              "not_executed"
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "message",
+          "outcome"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "error"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  }
+]

Changed8 schema fields changedv0.3.0Oct 19, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / busTrackId / description

Previous value: -"Stable track ID returned by list_tracks."New value: +"ID from list_tracks."

changedInput schema / properties / confirmationToken / description

Previous value: -"Short-lived, single-use token returned by the matching dry run."New value: +"Single-use plan token."

changedInput schema / properties / dryRun / description

Previous value: -"Omit or true to return a plan; false requires a valid confirmationToken."New value: +"False executes with token and hash."

changedInput schema / properties / expectedStateVersion / description

Previous value: -"Exact stateVersion observed immediately before planning."New value: +"Observed stateVersion."

changedInput schema / properties / mapping / items / properties / sourceTrackId / description

Previous value: -"Stable track ID returned by list_tracks."New value: +"ID from list_tracks."

changedInput schema / properties / mapping / items / properties / targetTrackId / description

Previous value: -"Stable track ID returned by list_tracks."New value: +"ID from list_tracks."

changedInput schema / properties / planHash / description

Previous value: -"Hash returned by the matching dry run."New value: +"Plan hash."

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "type": "object"
+}

Addedv0.2.0Sep 30, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark this as destructive and not idempotent, but the description adds meaningful behavioral detail: a guarded native callback, a Live undo step, and an attempted rollback across every changed track on failure. It also states what will not be restored, which is important for an agent assessing risk. It stops short of explaining rollback failure behavior or confirmation-token lifecycle, so a 4 rather than 5.

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 three dense sentences. The core action and mapping constraint are front-loaded, followed by rollback/undo behavior and exclusions. There is little waste, though the phrasing is somewhat compressed and could be 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?

For a destructive recall operation with an output schema and full parameter schema coverage, the description covers the key behavioral risks: undo, rollback, guarded execution, and what is not recreated. It does not detail preconditions around expectedStateVersion or the confirmation-token flow, but those are documented in the schema, so the description is largely complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains expectedStateVersion, name, busTrackId, mapping, dryRun, planHash, and confirmationToken. The description adds the key mapping constraint that every saved track must have one explicit source-to-target entry, but it does not add syntax or additional semantics beyond what the schema already provides. 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 gives a specific verb and resource: recall a saved group-system capture onto one-to-one mapped compatible existing Group Track and descendants. It also clarifies scope by saying it does not recreate tracks, devices, clips, or hidden plugin state, which helps separate it from mutating creation tools. The phrase 'Plan or apply' slightly overlaps the plan_group_system_recall sibling, keeping 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 Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied: use this to apply a saved capture when tracks already exist and a one-to-one mapping is required. The description gives a key exclusion ('Does not recreate tracks/devices/clips or hidden plugin state'), but it does not explicitly tell the agent when to use this versus plan_group_system_recall, load_group_system_snapshot, or recall_track_state_snapshot.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server