mcp-spotify

get_album

Retrieve album details from the Spotify catalog using an ID or URI to display information in your application.

Instructions

Get Spotify catalog information for an album

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "get_album"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	The Spotify ID or URI for the album

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.4.4Sep 11, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

Does 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 tool retrieves catalog information but doesn't mention aspects like rate limits, authentication requirements, error handling, or the format of the returned data. This is a significant gap for a read operation in an API context.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like authentication, rate limits, or error handling, nor does it hint at the structure of the returned catalog information. For a tool in a complex API environment, this leaves critical gaps for an agent.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the parameter 'id' documented as 'The Spotify ID or URI for the album'. The description doesn't add any extra semantic context beyond this, such as examples of valid IDs or URIs, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage without compensating further.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb ('get') and resource ('Spotify catalog information for an album'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'get_multiple_albums' or 'get_album_tracks', which limits its differentiation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention scenarios like retrieving a single album versus multiple albums (using 'get_multiple_albums') or accessing album tracks (using 'get_album_tracks'), leaving the agent without context for tool selection.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.