Complete Spotify OAuth authentication by exchanging the authorization code from the auth URL callback for access tokens, enabling subsequent API calls.
使用授权码完成Spotify OAuth认证。需要先调用spotify_get_auth_url获取授权URL
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| code | Yes | 从授权URL回调中获取的授权码 |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the purpose and prerequisite, but doesn't mention side effects like token storage, session establishment, or failure modes. This is a significant gap for a security-sensitive authentication step.
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 sentences with no redundancy: the first states the purpose, the second adds the critical prerequisite. Both are essential, and the description is front-loaded and 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 tool has no output schema and no annotations. The description fails to explain what the tool returns, what side effects occur (e.g., token persistence), or error behavior. The prerequisite is helpful, but the overall context is incomplete for an OAuth authentication tool.
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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains the 'code' parameter as the authorization code from the callback. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond restating that, so a baseline 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?
States the specific action (complete Spotify OAuth authentication) and resource (Spotify OAuth), and distinguishes itself from sibling playback tools by referencing the prerequisite spotify_get_auth_url. This makes the tool's role unambiguous.
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?
Explicitly instructs the agent to call spotify_get_auth_url first, establishing a clear sequence. It doesn't list alternatives or exclusions, but for an OAuth flow this is the natural completion step, so the guidance is sufficient.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.