Locate music on Deezer by query, returning matching tracks, albums, artists, and playlists with adjustable result counts per category.
Search Deezer for tracks, albums, artists, playlists.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Search query | |
| albums_first | No | Max albums (default 10) | |
| tracks_first | No | Max tracks (default 10) | |
| artists_first | No | Max artists (default 10) | |
| playlists_first | No | Max playlists (default 10) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full burden but fails to disclose behavioral traits such as result structure, pagination, authentication needs, or rate limits. Only the basic search functionality is mentioned, leaving significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.
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, front-loaded sentence that is efficient and to the point. However, it may be too brief given the complexity, missing opportunities to add value without excessive length.
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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain how results are combined across types, ordering, or what the response contains. More context is needed for an agent to correctly invoke and utilize the 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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add any extra parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides. The schema descriptions are adequate but minimal.
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 searches for multiple content types (tracks, albums, artists, playlists) on Deezer. It is a specific verb+resource combination that implicitly differentiates from sibling tools like get_album or get_track, though no explicit differentiation is provided.
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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., specific get endpoints). There is no mention of when not to use it or any context about suitability. The description only states what it does, leaving the agent to infer usage.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.