Spotify MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but only states the basic function without details on rate limits, authentication needs, response format, or error handling. It mentions searching 'on Spotify', implying external API use, but lacks specifics on constraints or performance traits.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary words. Every part ('Search for songs, artists, albums, or playlists on Spotify') directly contributes to understanding the tool's function, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (3 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is adequate as a starting point but incomplete. It covers the basic purpose but lacks details on behavioral traits, usage context, and output expectations, which are needed for effective agent operation without structured support.

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 input schema fully documents parameters like 'query', 'type', and 'limit'. The description adds minimal value by listing searchable items ('songs, artists, albums, or playlists'), which loosely maps to the 'type' enum, but doesn't provide additional syntax or format details beyond the schema.

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 action ('Search for') and resources ('songs, artists, albums, or playlists') with the platform ('on Spotify'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_top_tracks' or 'play_track', which also involve music retrieval but through different mechanisms.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't mention that this is for general searches, while 'get_top_tracks' might be for personalized recommendations or 'play_track' for immediate playback, leaving the agent to infer usage from context alone.

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