search_releasesSearch for albums and releases by title or artist name. Returns release IDs, titles, artists, release dates, and formats.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Maximum number of results to return. Defaults to 10. | |
| query | Yes | Release title or search query. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| total | Yes | Total number of matching releases | |
| releases | Yes | List of matching releases |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "properties": {
+ "releases": {
+ "description": "List of matching releases",
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "artist_credit": {
+ "description": "Artist credits for release",
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "artist_id": {
+ "description": "MusicBrainz artist ID",
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "description": "Artist name as credited",
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "date": {
+ "description": "Release date (YYYY-MM-DD)",
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "description": "MusicBrainz release ID",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "score": {
+ "description": "Search result relevance score",
+ "type": [
+ "number",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "status": {
+ "description": "Release status",
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "title": {
+ "description": "Release title",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "id",
+ "title"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "total": {
+ "description": "Total number of matching releases",
+ "type": "number"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "total",
+ "releases"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "query": "Abbey Road"
+ },
+ {
+ "limit": 15,
+ "query": "Pink Floyd The Wall"
+ }
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds return fields (release IDs, titles, artists, dates, formats) and search criteria (title or artist), but no further behavioral context such as pagination or rate limits.
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?
The description is two concise, front-loaded sentences with no redundant information. Every word earns its place, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.
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?
Given the tool's simplicity, the rich annotations, and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete. It covers what is searched, by what criteria, and what fields are returned, which is sufficient for this straightforward search tool.
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 100%, so parameters are well-documented. The description adds semantic value by explicitly mentioning 'title or artist name,' which clarifies the query parameter beyond the schema's 'Release title or search query.' This enriches parameter understanding.
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 the tool's function: 'Search for albums and releases by title or artist name.' It specifies the verb (search), resource (albums/releases), and scope (by title or artist), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_artists.
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?
The description gives clear context that this is for searching releases, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios. Since the purpose is unambiguous, an agent can infer when to use it, though the exclusion guidance is lacking.
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 are crisply separated (memory CRUD, subscription lifecycle, single-entity vs compare vs profile), but several broad entry points overlap: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, and ask_pipeworx_grounded are very close variants, and discover_tools/suggest_questions/ask_pipeworx all serve discovery/routing. Descriptions help, but an agent can still easily select one of the duplicate or adjacent tools instead of the intended one.
All names are readable snake_case and there are coherent families (polymarket_*, ask_pipeworx_*, search_*, get_*), but there is no consistent verb_noun convention: noun-phrase names like recent_alerts and pipeworx_trending coexist with single verbs like remember and forget and domain-prefixed nouns like polymarket_edges. Mixed, but still reasonably navigable.
At 35 tools, the surface is well past the comfortable 3-15 tool scope and even beyond the 16-25 heavy range unless the server has one explicit mega-purpose. The set also sprawls across music lookup, Pipeworx research, prediction markets, npm checks, LLM visibility, memory, and subscriptions, so no single coherent job emerges.
For the dominant read-only research workflow, the set is remarkably complete: discover tools, grounded and ungrounded asking, deep research, entity resolution, profiles, recent changes, comparisons, claim verification, search_within, plus full memory and subscription lifecycles. Minor gaps include the shallow music side relative to the rest of the server and the absence of an explicit source catalog.