Retrieve normalized Spotify album tracks by album ID, URI, or open.spotify.com URL, with optional limit and offset for pagination.
Retrieve Spotify album tracks. Returns normalized Spotify Web Player album tracks from private Pathfinder responses.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | No | Spotify album ID | |
| uri | No | Spotify album URI or open.spotify.com album URL | |
| limit | No | Track limit, clamped to 1-50 | |
| offset | No | Track offset |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavior. It states it returns 'normalized Spotify Web Player album tracks from private Pathfinder responses' but does not explain what 'normalized' means, what 'private Pathfinder responses' implies, or any constraints like authentication, rate limits, or side effects. Reads like a data retrieval tool, but lacks detail.
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?
Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action. No fluff or repetition. Every sentence adds value: first sentence states purpose, second gives context about return type and source.
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?
Despite good schema coverage, the description lacks completeness. No output schema, so agent doesn't know response structure. No explanation of how parameters interact (e.g., at least uri or id required?). For a tool with 4 optional params and no annotations, more context is needed to avoid misuse.
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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema; it simply says 'Retrieve Spotify album tracks'. No clarification on parameter relationships (e.g., uri vs id are likely alternatives, offset/limit pagination) beyond what the schema already provides.
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 retrieves album tracks, with specific verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'Spotify album tracks'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like spotify_album (which returns album metadata) and spotify_track (single track). The mention of 'normalized' and 'private Pathfinder responses' adds context.
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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like spotify_tracks_search or spotify_artist_albums. No indication of prerequisites (e.g., requiring album URI or ID) or scenarios where this tool is preferred.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.