Skip to main content
Glama

create_smart_playlist

Create playlists from your top tracks, recently played, or saved tracks. Filter by artist, enforce one track per artist, and preview changes with dry run before saving.

Instructions

Create a playlist from rules over your own listening data: top tracks (by time range), recently played, or saved tracks — with optional artist-name filtering and a one-track-per-artist toggle. When source=saved_tracks the pool is the newest N saved tracks (N=scan_cap, default fetchAllCap=500) and truncation is reported. No deprecated recommendations endpoints involved. dry_run previews the exact track list without creating anything.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesPlaylist name
limitNoHow many tracks the playlist should hold (after filters). Default 30.
publicNoWhether the playlist is public
sourceNoWhere candidates come from: your top tracks by time_range, your recently played history, or your saved (liked) tracks.top_tracks
dry_runNoPreview only: validate inputs and describe exactly what would change without performing it
scan_capNoHow many saved tracks to scan when source=saved_tracks; default SPOTIFY_MCP_FETCH_ALL_CAP (500). Reports truncation when hit.
time_rangeNo~4 weeks / ~6 months / all time. Default: medium_term
descriptionNoPlaylist description
artist_filterNoOnly include tracks whose artist name contains any of these substrings (case-insensitive), e.g. ["Radiohead", "Miles Davis"].
unique_artistsNoKeep at most one track per primary artist. Default false.
response_formatNo'concise' = human prose, 'detailed' = more fields in prose, 'json' = raw API objectconcise

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.28.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / response_format
      Added value: +{
      +  "default": "concise",
      +  "description": "'concise' = human prose, 'detailed' = more fields in prose, 'json' = raw API object",
      +  "enum": [
      +    "concise",
      +    "detailed",
      +    "json"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  2. Addedv1.26.1

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden and it does this well: it discloses that dry_run 'previews the exact track list without creating anything,' that saved_tracks scans the newest N tracks with truncation reported, and that deprecated recommendations endpoints are not involved. It does not mention required authorization scopes or what the non-dry-run response shape is, which keeps it from being fully exhaustive.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is four tight sentences with the core capability front-loaded and supporting details following in order of relevance. Every sentence earns its place: rule sources, saved_tracks pool semantics, the deprecated-endpoints clarification, and dry_run behavior. No filler or repetition of schema descriptions.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For an 11-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the critical interactions and side-effect caveats, especially scan_cap + saved_tracks truncation and dry_run behavior. It relies appropriately on the dense input schema for individual parameter descriptions, but it does not describe the normal (non-dry-run) return format or any required Spotify scopes, leaving a small completeness gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaningful cross-parameter semantics beyond the schema: scan_cap only applies to source=saved_tracks, the pool is the newest N saved tracks, truncation is reported, and dry_run changes whether anything is created. It also relates artist_filter and unique_artists to the filtering behavior described in prose.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a specific verb and resource: 'Create a playlist from rules over your own listening data' and immediately enumerates the concrete source modes (top tracks, recently played, saved tracks). It distinguishes this from the generic create_playlist sibling by emphasizing rule-based construction from personal listening data. The 'No deprecated recommendations endpoints involved' note further disambiguates it from recommendation-style tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives a clear use case: use this when building a playlist from your own listening data with optional filtering, and use dry_run for preview-only. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives like create_playlist or save_smart_playlist_rule or state when not to use them, so it stops short of a 5. The context is otherwise clear enough to route an agent.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools