Retrieve streaming statistics for a specific track in a user's library using SpotifyMCP.
Stream totals for one track within a user library
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | 1–100. Default: 50 | |
| user_id | Yes | stats.fm user id or customId (e.g. "martijn") | |
| track_id | Yes | stats.fm track id | |
| response_format | No | 'concise' = human prose, 'detailed' = more fields in prose, 'json' = raw API object | concise |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.29.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
There are no annotations, and the description does not state whether this is read-only, whether authentication is required, or whether rate limits or pagination apply. It is likely a query, but the safety and side-effect profile is not made explicit.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single, focused sentence that front-loads the core purpose with no filler or redundant detail.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple query tool with well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description is sufficient to understand the scope. It does not provide extra context such as time range or aggregation details, but nothing essential is missing for correct invocation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% and each parameter already has a useful description, including limit range/default, user_id format, track_id type, and response_format values. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific action ('stream totals') and a specific resource ('one track within a user library'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling statsfm tools like statsfm_track_date_stats, statsfm_artist_stats, or statsfm_top_tracks.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The intended use must be inferred from the name and the short description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.