Skip to main content
Glama
NovaLux12

SpotifyMCP

by NovaLux12
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

remove_unavailable_playlist_items

Remove unavailable (null) tracks from a Spotify playlist, preserving healthy copies. Use dry-run to preview changes before applying.

Instructions

Remove unavailable (null track) items from a playlist — actionable companion to playlist_health_check. Targets only unavailable occurrences by position so healthy copies are preserved. Read-only dry_run preview available.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dry_runNoPreview only — no writes
max_resultsNoMax unavailable items to remove (default 100)
playlist_idYesPlaylist ID or Spotify URL/URI
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

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden and does well: it states that the tool targets only unavailable occurrences by position, preserves healthy copies, and mentions the read-only dry_run preview. It stops short of stating permissions or irreversibility, but the core mutation behavior is transparent.

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 three short, dense sentences with no filler. It front-loads the primary action, then adds sibling context and a safety/scope note. Every sentence earns its place and the structure is easy to scan.

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 mutation tool without annotations or an output schema, the description covers the essential operational details: what is removed, how targeting works, and the availability of a read-only preview. It doesn't explicitly mention irreversibility or required permissions, but the action and behavior are clear enough for correct invocation.

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%, so all parameter semantics are already provided by the schema. The description only mentions dry_run as a preview, which largely restates the schema's 'Preview only — no writes.' No additional parameter meaning is added, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the action ('Remove unavailable (null track) items from a playlist') with a specific verb and resource, and explicitly differentiates itself as the 'actionable companion to playlist_health_check.' It also adds a key distinguishing detail (position-based targeting that preserves healthy copies), making it unambiguous against generic removal 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 provides clear contextual guidance by positioning the tool as the actionable companion to playlist_health_check, implying it is used after a health check, and scoping its use to unavailable occurrences only. It doesn't enumerate explicit exclusions or alternative tools, but the context is sufficient for an agent to select it appropriately.

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