spotify_album_getGet a Spotify album by id or album URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | No | Optional Spotify album URL for the request. | |
| albumId | No | Optional Spotify album id for the request. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe read behavior is covered. The description adds no extra behavioral context (e.g., response format, data fields, rate limits). It only restates the input mechanism, which is schema-level information. Since it adds nothing beyond the annotations, a low score is appropriate.
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 a single, concise sentence that states the action and the two acceptable inputs. Every word earns its place, and the core purpose is front-loaded. No filler or unnecessary detail.
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 read-only get tool with no output schema, the description is adequate but not complete. It doesn't explicitly state that exactly one of the two optional parameters is required, nor does it hint at what the response contains. Given the low complexity, these gaps are minor but still exist.
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 100%, meaning both 'url' and 'albumId' are already documented in the schema. The description only adds the phrase 'by id or album URL', which is redundant with the schema. It doesn't clarify that at least one is required or explain the interplay between them, so it adds no value beyond 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?
The description clearly states the verb ('Get') and the resource ('a Spotify album') and specifies the two input forms ('by id or album URL'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like spotify_artist_get and spotify_track_get by explicitly naming 'album'.
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 usage context by stating that an album id or URL is needed. It doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives or compare with sibling tools, but the resource-specific name and the input specification make the intended usage clear. No misleading guidance is present.
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.
Each tool is clearly scoped to a specific platform and action (e.g., facebook_post_get vs instagram_post_get). Descriptions explicitly differentiate similar tools across platforms, and within-a-platform tools like tiktok_search_videos_list vs tiktok_search_hashtag_list have clear disambiguation notes.
All 167 tools follow a strict `platform_resource_action` pattern (e.g., youtube_video_comments_list). No mixing of styles—snake_case throughout, with consistent verb ordering (get, list, search, etc.).
The server has 167 tools, which is far beyond the typical well-scoped range of 3-15. While the broad multi-platform scope justifies many tools, this extreme number makes the tool surface overwhelming and difficult for an agent to navigate efficiently.
The tool set covers a wide range of platforms and operations including profile retrieval, post/video fetching, comments, search, transcripts, and ad library access. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no Facebook events or LinkedIn messaging), but the surface is comprehensive for a read-only data aggregation use case.