Adds a specific track to the Spotify playback queue using its track ID from a search, so the track plays next.
Add a track to the playback queue. track_id comes from search_track.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| track_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the core action, but does not mention side effects, idempotency, device requirements, or other behavioral details. This is a thin description for a mutating operation.
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?
Two short sentences with no unnecessary wording. The primary action is front-loaded and the parameter provenance is a valuable addition that earns its place.
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?
With a single required parameter, a clear source for that parameter, and an output schema present, the definition is mostly complete for an agent to invoke it correctly. The main missing piece is behavioral context around queueing, but this is minor given the tool's simplicity.
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 description coverage is 0%, but the description compensates by explaining that track_id comes from search_track, giving the agent a clear source for the parameter. It does not elaborate on format or constraints, but for a single simple parameter this is reasonably sufficient.
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?
The description uses a specific verb ('Add') and a specific resource ('track to the playback queue'), making the tool's function immediately clear. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like add_tracks by specifying the playback queue rather than a playlist.
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?
The description clearly implies usage after search_track by stating that track_id comes from search_track. It gives helpful context for when to use this tool, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.