am_list_playlistsLists all playlists in your Apple Music library with their IDs, so you can quickly locate and manage your saved playlists.
List every playlist in the current user's library, including IDs. Use am_show_playlist when the tracks of one playlist are needed. / 中文：列出当前账号音乐库里的所有歌单（含 ID）。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds scope (current user's library) and output content (IDs), but does not add further behavioral context such as pagination or rate limits. With annotations carrying the main burden, this is adequate.
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?
The description is compact and front-loaded with the key action and scope. The second sentence routes to a relevant sibling, and the Chinese translation serves multilingual users without adding conceptual clutter.
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 zero-parameter, read-only list operation, the description fully covers purpose, scope, output (IDs), and sibling routing. No output schema is present, but the description gives enough detail about what the agent can expect.
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?
The tool takes zero parameters, and the schema has 100% coverage with no properties. The description does not need to explain parameters, so the baseline of 4 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?
The description clearly states a specific action and resource: list every playlist in the current user's library, including IDs. It also differentiates itself from the sibling am_show_playlist, which focuses on tracks of a single 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?
It explicitly names the alternative tool am_show_playlist and gives the condition for using it (when tracks of one playlist are needed). This gives the agent clear routing guidance beyond mere purpose.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.