Music360 MCP

music360_list_videograma

Lista registros de videograma do tenant atual.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No
`search`	No
`order_by`	No	Campo para ordenacao (ex.: data_lancamento/lancamento, nome, atualizacao, criacao). Para produto fonografico, "lancamento" e "mais recente" significam data_lancamento. Quando omitido, usa ordenacao padrao da entidade.
`per_page`	No
`order_dir`	No	Direcao da ordenacao: ASC crescente, DESC decrescente (padrao).
`response_profile`	No	Perfil de resposta. Listagens usam summary por padrão; sensitive exige admin.
`sensitive_access_purpose`	No	Finalidade operacional obrigatória quando response_profile=sensitive ou include_sensitive_details=true.
`include_sensitive_details`	No	Retorna detalhes sensíveis mínimos quando autorizado por escopo admin. Padrão: false.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`data`	Yes	Resultado paginado.
`success`	Yes	Indica se a operacao foi bem-sucedida.
`entity_type`	Yes	Tipo da entidade consultada.

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral burden but only adds 'do tenant atual' (current tenant scope). It does not disclose default ordering, pagination behavior, response profile selections, or sensitive access requirements, which are relevant given the rich input schema.

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?

The description is a single, focused sentence with no fluff. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy to parse. Extreme terseness is a tradeoff, but for pure conciseness it earns a top score.

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 an output schema, the description misses critical context: there is no hint about pagination defaults, sort behavior, or sensitive data handling. For an 8-parameter tool, this description is insufficient to guide effective use.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The schema has 63% coverage with some parameter descriptions, but the tool description adds no parameter information. It doesn't compensate for the undocumented parameters like page, search, and per_page, and doesn't clarify how response_profile or sensitive_details work.

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 'Lista registros de videograma do tenant atual' clearly states the verb (Lista), the resource (registros de videograma), and scope (tenant atual). It distinguishes from sibling tools like music360_get_videograma (single record) and music360_list_tipos_videograma (types, not records).

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?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, nor mentions of filtering or pagination. Usage is only implied by the tool name and listing nature.

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

All Music360 MCP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose, targeting a specific entity or reference data. The get/list distinction is standard and unambiguous. Reference list tools are also clearly separated by domain.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with the prefix 'music360_'. Verbs are consistently 'get', 'list', 'search', or 'healthcheck', and the naming is uniform throughout. No mixed conventions or vague verbs.

Tool Count2/5

At 33 tools, the set is quite large, exceeding the threshold where tool count becomes unwieldy. While the domain has many entity types, the lack of mutation tools means many similar read-only list/get tools inflate the count without adding corresponding functionality.

Completeness1/5

The tool set is severely incomplete for a management system: there are no create, update, or delete tools for any entity. The reference list tools explicitly reference create tools like 'music360_create_fonograma' that do not exist, leaving clear dead ends and an inability to perform core operations.

Resources

Need Help?