Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AbletonMCP

AbletonMCP

by rephlex187
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

remove_notes_from_clip

Remove MIDI notes from a clip by specifying a pitch and time range. Focuses deletion on selected note region.

Instructions

Remove MIDI notes from a clip within the given pitch/time window.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "ctx": "<ctx>",
      "track_index": "<track_index>",
      "clip_index": "<clip_index>"
    },
    "name": "remove_notes_from_clip"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ctxYes
from_timeNo
time_spanNo
clip_indexYes
from_pitchNo
pitch_spanNo
track_indexYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden. It only says 'Remove MIDI notes', implying mutation, but does not disclose if notes are permanently deleted, if the operation is undoable, or any side effects. Lacks behavioral depth.

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?

Single sentence of 14 words, front-loaded with action verb 'Remove'. Efficient and clear with no filler. Every word contributes.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite having 7 parameters and 3 required, the description does not explain how parameters define the pitch/time window or what the outcome is. No output schema, so agent lacks context for correct usage. Incomplete for a mutation tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema covers 7 parameters, but description does not mention any parameter or its meaning. Schema titles (e.g., 'From Time', 'Clip Index') are somewhat helpful, but the description adds zero value beyond the schema. With 0% coverage, baseline is low and description fails to compensate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states 'Remove MIDI notes from a clip within the given pitch/time window.' It clearly identifies the verb (remove), resource (MIDI notes from a clip), and scope (pitch/time window). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'add_notes_to_clip' and 'get_notes_from_clip'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use, or that 'add_notes_to_clip' might be used for adding. The context is implied but not explicit.

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