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. It states the action ('Remove') but does not mention permissions needed, whether the change is reversible, error conditions, or rate limits. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool without annotation support.

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 action and resource. There is no wasted language, making it easy to parse and understand immediately.

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 (a mutation with one optional parameter) and lack of annotations or output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the purpose and parameter default but misses behavioral details like error handling or response format, leaving gaps for an agent.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the optional 'track_id' parameter. The description adds value by clarifying the default behavior ('uses current track if not provided'), which enhances understanding beyond the schema's basic description.

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 specific action ('Remove') and resource ('track from your Liked Songs'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'like_track' (which adds) and 'get_current_track' (which reads). It precisely defines the tool's function without redundancy.

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 implies usage when removing a liked track, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., 'like_track' for adding, or other playback tools). It lacks context on prerequisites or exclusions, leaving usage inferred rather than stated.

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