Skip to main content
Glama

search_albums

Search Spotify for albums by title, artist, or keyword. Returns matching albums with details, optionally filtered by market and result limits.

Instructions

Search albums only (GET /search?type=album). Quota: 🟢 single.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoResults per type, 1–10. Default: 5
queryYesSearch query
marketNoISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code, e.g. 'US'
offsetNoIndex of the first result to return, 0–1000
max_resultsNoMax items to return
response_formatNo'concise' = human prose, 'detailed' = more fields in prose, 'json' = raw API objectconcise
include_externalNoPass "audio" to include externally-hosted audio items

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.28.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / market / description
      Previous value: -"ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code"New value: +"ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code, e.g. 'US'"
    • addedInput schema / properties / market / pattern
      Added value: +"^[A-Za-z]{2}$"
  2. Addedv1.26.1

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It adds useful context by naming the endpoint and quota cost ('🟢 single'), but it does not describe response behavior, result format, or confirm the read-only nature beyond what the operation implies.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The core scope is front-loaded, and the quota note is a useful one-line addition.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description is adequate for a simple read-only search with a fully documented schema, but it omits explicit guidance on when to prefer this over the generic search tool and does not state expected return semantics. It is functional but leaves some context implicit.

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 all seven parameters with types, constraints, and defaults. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, which is acceptable given the schema's completeness.

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 states a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('albums only'), and includes the exact API endpoint. This cleanly distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_tracks and search_artists.

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 'albums only' phrasing implies this tool is for album-scoped searches, but it does not explicitly route users away from the generic 'search' tool or explain when a broader search would be preferable. Usage is inferable but not stated.

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