Spotify & TMDB Web MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

get_user_playlists

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the current user's Spotify playlists with song counts, with an optional limit to control how many playlists are returned for review or management.

Instructions

Get the current user's playlists with song counts.

Args: limit: Number of playlists to fetch (default 10, max 50)

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_user_playlists"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 6, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavior beyond that: results include song counts and the limit is capped at 50. An output schema exists, so not explaining the return shape is acceptable.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The core sentence is front-loaded and wastes nothing. The docstring-style 'Args:' block is slightly inelegant for a one-parameter tool, but it is short and the information is easy to scan.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

This is a simple single-optional-parameter read tool with a full annotation set and an output schema. The description covers the purpose, the returned content, and the one parameter's bounds, leaving nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0% and the single `limit` property has only a default of 10 in the schema. The description compensates by restating the default and adding a max of 50 that appears nowhere in the structured data, which is the key semantic the agent needs.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get the current user's playlists') and adds a content detail ('with song counts') that tells the agent what it will see. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings such as get_playlist_tracks, but the 'current user' scoping makes the distinction reasonably inferable.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied: the 'current user's playlists' framing signals a listing operation distinct from per-playlist track retrieval. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer get_playlist_tracks, and no note on pagination or what to do past the 50 cap.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server