netease-desktop-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

netease_search

netease_search

Find songs by searching the desktop app UI. Returns matching tracks and a short-lived token for further actions, without starting playback.

Instructions

Search songs in the desktop UI. Changes the visible search page; returns a partial list and a token valid for two minutes in this MCP session. Does not play music.

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "netease_search"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`query`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0-alpha.4Sep 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses that the tool changes the visible search page, returns only a partial list, and issues a token valid for two minutes in the session. It also clearly states it does not play music, adding non-obvious behavioral context. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Three short sentences with the main action first, followed by side effects and a clarifying non-goal. Every sentence adds distinct value and there is no filler.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a two-parameter search with an output schema, the description captures purpose, side effect, token validity, and a non-goal. The main gap is the absence of any parameter semantics, which is already penalized separately; overall it gives an agent enough to invoke and reason about results.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should clarify query and limit. It mentions 'partial list' which hints at a limit, but never explains what query should contain or how limit controls results. This leaves the agent to guess parameter meaning.

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 opening 'Search songs in the desktop UI' names a specific verb and resource, and the closing 'Does not play music' explicitly delimits what the tool is not for. This is enough to set it apart from playback siblings like netease_play_result.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives useful context: it mutates the visible search page and returns a token valid for two minutes, implying it is for initiating searches rather than playback. It never names sibling tools or conditions for choosing them; the only exclusion is the non-goal statement.

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

Deploy Server