Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

discogs_label_releases

List releases for a Discogs label by label ID. Paginate results with page and per_page, returning release details and total count.

Instructions

List a Discogs label's releases. Lists the releases on a Discogs label, identified by the required label id. Paged with page (default 1) and per_page (default 50, max 100). Each entry has its release id, title, artist, format, catalogue number (catno), status, year and thumbnail, and the response reports the total item count across all pages.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesDiscogs label id
pageNo1-based page number, default 1
per_pageNoResults per page, default 50, max 100

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.5.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses pagination behavior (defaults of 1 and 50, max 100) and enumerates the fields returned per entry plus the total item count. It does not state any auth or rate-limit constraints, but for a read-only listing tool this is solid behavioral context.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose and tightly scoped, but the first sentence ('List a Discogs label's releases') is immediately restated by the second ('Lists the releases on a Discogs label...'), which is mild redundancy. Otherwise no wasted sentences.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description correctly compensates by describing the returned fields and the total count. For a 3-param listing tool with full schema coverage, this is essentially complete; only auth/error behavior is unaddressed.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description restates the same defaults (page=1, per_page=50, max 100) already present in the schema, adding no syntax or format detail beyond it.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb (List) and resource (a Discogs label's releases), and the required `id` anchor makes clear it is keyed to a label rather than an artist. An agent can distinguish it from discogs_artist_releases and discogs_label without opening any schema.

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 implied by the resource described, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives (e.g. discogs_artist_releases for artist-side queries), and no prerequisites. Adequate but leaves routing to inference.

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