Skip to main content
Glama
NovaLux12

SpotifyMCP

by NovaLux12
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

save_release_radar

Archive your Spotify Release Radar into a persistent playlist, creating or overwriting it. Validates inputs with a dry-run preview and skips updates if the archive already matches. Identifies the source playlist by owner and URL.

Instructions

Archive your Release Radar into a regular playlist (creates or overwrites the archive). Resolves Release Radar via /me/playlists exact match first, falling back to search (unverified); dry_run previews; idempotent if archive already matches. Result echoes source identity (owner, url, verified).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dry_runNoPreview only: validate inputs and describe exactly what would change without performing it
archive_nameNoArchive playlist name (created if missing, overwritten if present)Release Radar Archive
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 changedv1.31.0
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  2. Addedv1.26.1

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (only destructiveHint=false), the description richly discloses behavior: resolution via exact match then fallback to unverified search, dry_run preview behavior, idempotency when the archive already matches, and output echoing source identity. These are meaningful operational details an agent needs.

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 dense but efficient: the primary purpose is front-loaded, and each subsequent sentence contributes a distinct behavioral fact. No filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the moderate complexity, full schema coverage, and lack of an output schema, the description covers the critical aspects: what happens, safety behavior via dry_run, idempotency, resolution logic, and the result format. Nothing essential for correct invocation 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%, so the schema fully documents dry_run, archive_name, and response_format. The description adds no new parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides, landing at the baseline score.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Archive your Release Radar into a regular playlist (creates or overwrites the archive).' It clearly differentiates this tool from similar siblings by naming the exact source playlist and the archive action.

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 description implies the usage context: use this to archive Release Radar into a playlist. However, it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over related alternatives like save_discover_weekly, nor does it mention any when-not-to-use conditions.

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