Skip to main content
Glama
NovaLux12

SpotifyMCP

by NovaLux12
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

history_search

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search Spotify portability, backup, and mutation-history records by substring; each hit names its source. Runs locally with no API.

Instructions

Search portability, backup and mutation-history stores; hits name their source. Quota: local only (no API).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryNoSubstring to match
scopeNoScopeall
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 changedv2.1.2
    • changedInput schema / properties / query / description
      Previous value: -"Substring to match (default: all)"New value: +"Substring to match"
    • addedInput schema / properties / scope
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "all",
+  "description": "Scope",
+  "enum": [
+    "portability",
+    "backups",
+    "history",
+    "all"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.31.0
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  3. Addedv1.26.1

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint), and the description adds genuinely useful operational context beyond them: the tool is local-only with no API quota consumption, and hits carry their source label. This is meaningful behavioral disclosure an agent cannot get from annotations alone.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Two short clauses, front-loaded with the action and resources, followed by the two most decision-relevant facts (source labeling, local-only quota). No wasted text, though the telegraphic style leaves some inference to the agent.

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?

With no output schema, the description at least tells the agent that results are annotated with their source, and notes the local-only execution model. For a parameterized search with full schema coverage this is close to sufficient; only the multi-store result shape remains underspecified.

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%, including the scope enum and response_format semantics, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description adds nothing about query matching behavior (e.g., case sensitivity) beyond the schema's 'Substring to match'. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb (Search) and enumerates the three distinct stores it covers (portability, backup, mutation-history), which separates it from library search siblings like search_saved_tracks or search_deep. It stops short of naming a specific sibling alternative, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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?

The 'local only (no API)' note implies when this is preferable (cheap, offline, no quota cost), but there is no explicit when-to-use versus search_history_stats, list_backups, or undo_mutation guidance, and no exclusions. Usage is only implied.

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