Artist Top Tracks
artist_top_tracksMost-played tracks for an artist.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| mbid | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| artist | Yes |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| toptracks | No | Top tracks container |
artist_top_tracksMost-played tracks for an artist.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| mbid | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| artist | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| toptracks | No | Top tracks container |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "artist": "David Bowie"
+ },
+ {
+ "artist": "Pink Floyd",
+ "limit": 10
+ }
+]Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "properties": {
+ "toptracks": {
+ "description": "Top tracks container",
+ "properties": {
+ "@attr": {
+ "properties": {
+ "artist": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "page": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "perPage": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "total": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "totalPages": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "track": {
+ "description": "Array of top tracks",
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "artist": {
+ "properties": {
+ "name": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "url": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "listeners": {
+ "description": "Number of listeners",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "description": "Track name",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "playcount": {
+ "description": "Play count",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "url": {
+ "description": "Track URL",
+ "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 declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so safety is covered. But the description adds nothing beyond 'most-played tracks'—no details on data freshness, return format, or pagination.
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 short (5 words), which is under-specification rather than conciseness. Front-loading is fine, but lacks structure and substantive content.
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?
Despite having an output schema, the description does not hint at what the tool returns (e.g., a list of tracks). For three parameters and a non-trivial output, the description is incomplete for an agent to understand behavior.
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 description coverage is 0%, so description must explain parameters. It does not clarify mbid (likely MusicBrainz ID), limit, or the purpose of artist beyond its property name. No added value over the schema.
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?
Description clearly states the tool returns most-played tracks for an artist, which is a specific verb-resource combination. It distinguishes from siblings like 'track_info' and 'artist_info'. However, it lacks nuance on what defines 'top' (e.g., play count or popularity).
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 vs alternatives like 'track_search' or 'user_top_tracks'. No mention of when not to use or prerequisites.
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.