albumAlbum metadata + tracklist by Deezer album id.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | No | Album ID | |
| cover | No | Album cover image URL | |
| title | No | Album title | |
| artist | No | ||
| tracks | No | ||
| duration | No | Total duration in seconds | |
| release_date | No | Release date ISO format |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "id": 302127
+ }
+]Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "properties": {
+ "artist": {
+ "properties": {
+ "id": {
+ "description": "Artist ID",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "description": "Artist name",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "cover": {
+ "description": "Album cover image URL",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "duration": {
+ "description": "Total duration in seconds",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "description": "Album ID",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "release_date": {
+ "description": "Release date ISO format",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "title": {
+ "description": "Album title",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "tracks": {
+ "properties": {
+ "data": {
+ "description": "Array of tracks on the album",
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "duration": {
+ "description": "Duration in seconds",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "description": "Track ID",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "preview": {
+ "description": "Preview URL",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "title": {
+ "description": "Track title",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds the return content (metadata + tracklist) but doesn't disclose additional traits beyond the annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Extremely concise, one sentence front-loading the core purpose. No extraneous words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple retrieval tool with an output schema, the description is adequate. It could include more context, but the presence of an output schema mitigates the need for return value details.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 0% for the 'id' parameter, but the description explicitly mentions 'by Deezer album id', adding meaningful context beyond the schema's type-only definition.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states that the tool retrieves album metadata and tracklist using a Deezer album ID. It specifies the resource and method, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'artist' or 'track'.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
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. With many sibling tools (e.g., artist, track), an agent lacks context for tool selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Many tools overlap in purpose (ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research all route queries to structured data), and the set mixes Deezer music tools with an unrelated Pipeworx/Polymarket suite. An agent would struggle to pick the right tool for a given request.
Naming is mixed: single-word nouns (album, artist, track, chart), verb_noun snake_case (list_subscriptions, resolve_entity), and verbose multi-concept names (scan_competitor_ai_presence, polymarket_kalshi_spread). No consistent pattern across the set.
37 tools for a server named 'Deezer' is far beyond a music API scope; the overwhelming majority are unrelated data-research, prediction-market, and utility tools. This is an extreme mismatch between the server name and the tool surface.
For the Deezer music domain, the surface is incomplete (no playlists, user library, lyrics, or radio), while the many unrelated tools each cover only fragments of their domains. The overall set lacks coherent coverage of any single purpose.