Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

discogs_label

Use a Discogs label ID to get its profile: name, contact info, websites, images, quality rating, page URI, parent label, and sub-labels.

Instructions

Get a Discogs label profile. Returns the profile of a Discogs label by its required label id: name, profile text, contact info, website URLs, images, data quality rating, and Discogs page URI. The parent label and the list of sub-labels are included, and the parent label appears only when the label has one.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesDiscogs label id

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.5.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does usefully disclose output shape and a conditional behavior (parent label appears only when one exists), which implies a safe read. But it omits auth requirements, rate limits, error behavior for an invalid id, and pagination/response format concerns.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action and then the return payload; no filler or marketing language. The trailing clause about parent/sub-labels is slightly dense but still earns its place by describing conditional output.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With no output schema and a single trivial parameter, the description compensates well by listing return fields (name, profile, contact, URLs, images, rating, URI) and the parent/sub-label behavior. The only real gap is the absence of any guidance on acquiring the label id.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100% for the single 'id' parameter, so the schema already documents it. The description only reiterates that the id is required and refers to 'label id', adding no syntax, format, or source-of-id guidance beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 a Discogs label profile') and enumerates the returned fields, so the agent knows exactly what entity is fetched. However, it never contrasts itself with closely named siblings like discogs_artist or discogs_label_releases, leaving the label-vs-artist distinction to be inferred from the name.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description gives no when-to-use context, no prerequisites (e.g., obtain the id via discogs_search first), and no alternative tools for adjacent needs such as discogs_label_releases. Usage is only implied by the tool name and resource.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools