Skip to main content
Glama
NovaLux12

SpotifyMCP

by NovaLux12
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

find_duplicate_tracks_across_playlists

Read-onlyIdempotent

Identify tracks that appear in more than one specified playlist. Returns cross-playlist duplicates from up to 20 playlists, simplifying playlist management.

Instructions

Find tracks that appear in more than one of the given playlists (cross-playlist dupes). Quota: N GETs (one per playlist).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
playlistsNoCanonical ordered playlists (2–20)
max_resultsNoMax items to return (default: SPOTIFY_MCP_MAX_ITEMS env or 50)
response_formatNo'concise' = human prose, 'detailed' = more fields in prose, 'json' = raw API objectconcise

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv3.0.1
    • removedInput schema / properties / playlist_ids
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Deprecated one-release alias supported through v2.0; removed in v2.1. Provide this complete alias or canonical playlists.",
-  "items": {
-    "description": "Playlist ID, spotify:playlist: URI, or Spotify playlist URL; use this reference in the canonical or documented legacy field",
-    "minLength": 1,
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "maxItems": 20,
-  "minItems": 2,
-  "type": "array"
-}
    • changedInput schema / properties / playlists / description
      Previous value: -"Canonical ordered playlists (2–20), or provide the complete documented legacy alias accepted by this tool"New value: +"Canonical ordered playlists (2–20)"
  2. Changed6 schema fields changedv1.31.0
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • changedInput schema / properties / playlist_ids / description
      Previous value: -"Playlist IDs to compare (2–20)"New value: +"Deprecated one-release alias supported through v2.0; removed in v2.1. Provide this complete alias or canonical playlists."
    • addedInput schema / properties / playlist_ids / items / description
      Added value: +"Playlist ID, spotify:playlist: URI, or Spotify playlist URL; use this reference in the canonical or documented legacy field"
    • addedInput schema / properties / playlists
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Canonical ordered playlists (2–20), or provide the complete documented legacy alias accepted by this tool",
+  "items": {
+    "description": "Playlist ID, spotify:playlist: URI, or Spotify playlist URL; use this reference in the canonical or documented legacy field",
+    "minLength": 1,
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "maxItems": 20,
+  "minItems": 2,
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "playlist_ids"
-]
  3. Addedv1.26.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so safety is covered. The description adds the API-quota behavior (one GET per playlist, N total), which annotations do not convey, but it says nothing about how duplicates are reported, ordering, or truncation with max_results.

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?

Two short sentences, zero filler, with the scope definition and the quota cost front-loaded. Every clause earns its place.

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 a read-only, idempotent tool with three fully documented parameters and no output schema, the definition covers purpose and cost adequately. It could be slightly richer about what a duplicate match looks like, but nothing essential to invoking it is missing.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%: the playlist ID formats, the 2-20 bound, the max_results default, and the response_format enum are all documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax or semantic detail beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (find) and resource (tracks) plus the exact scope qualifier 'appear in more than one of the given playlists (cross-playlist dupes)'. The parenthetical explicitly disambiguates it from the within-playlist sibling find_duplicates_in_playlist/remove_duplicate_playlist_items without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It gives cost guidance (N GETs, one per playlist), which is genuinely useful, but never states when to prefer this over sibling overlap tools such as overlap_playlists, playlist_symmetric_difference, or playlist_union. Usage is implied by the purpose line rather than explicitly routed.

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