Fetch playlists for a Spotify artist using an artist ID, URI, or open.spotify.com URL. Returns structured playlist data from Spotify Web Player responses.
Retrieve Spotify artist playlists. Returns artist playlists from Spotify Web Player private Pathfinder responses.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | No | Spotify artist ID | |
| uri | No | Spotify artist URI or open.spotify.com artist URL |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'private Pathfinder responses' suggesting reliance on a non-public API, but lacks details on authentication, rate limits, or whether the tool is read-only. The safety profile is unclear.
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 brief with two sentences, but the second sentence largely repeats the first ('Returns artist playlists' vs 'Retrieve Spotify artist playlists'). Slightly redundant, but still efficient.
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?
The description does not define what 'artist playlists' are (playlists featuring the artist vs. curated by the artist). With no output schema, the tool should hint at the return format or structure. The reference to 'private Pathfinder responses' adds ambiguity rather than clarity.
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?
The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters (uri and id). The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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 verb 'Retrieve' and the resource 'Spotify artist playlists', making the purpose explicit. It distinguishes from sibling tools like spotify_artist_albums and spotify_artist_related by specifying the exact resource.
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 such as spotify_playlists_search or spotify_featured_charts_by_country. The description does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or context for optimal use.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.