Skip to main content
Glama

lidarr_get_albums

Retrieve available and missing albums for a specific artist in Lidarr to manage music collection gaps.

Instructions

Get albums for an artist in Lidarr. Shows which albums are available and which are missing.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
artistIdYesArtist ID to get albums for

Implementation Reference

  • Core handler implementation in LidarrClient that performs the API request to Lidarr's /api/v1/album endpoint filtered by artistId to retrieve albums.
    async getAlbums(artistId?: number): Promise<Album[]> {
      const url = artistId ? `/album?artistId=${artistId}` : '/album';
      return this['request']<Album[]>(url);
    }
  • MCP tool dispatch handler that validates Lidarr configuration, extracts artistId from arguments, calls LidarrClient.getAlbums, and formats the response as JSON text content.
    case "lidarr_get_albums": {
      if (!clients.lidarr) throw new Error("Lidarr not configured");
      const artistId = (args as { artistId: number }).artistId;
      const albums = await clients.lidarr.getAlbums(artistId);
      return {
        content: [{
          type: "text",
          text: JSON.stringify({
            count: albums.length,
            albums: albums.map(a => ({
              id: a.id,
              title: a.title,
              releaseDate: a.releaseDate,
              albumType: a.albumType,
              monitored: a.monitored,
              tracks: a.statistics ? `${a.statistics.trackFileCount}/${a.statistics.totalTrackCount}` : 'unknown',
              sizeOnDisk: formatBytes(a.statistics?.sizeOnDisk || 0),
              percentComplete: a.statistics?.percentOfTracks || 0,
              grabbed: a.grabbed,
            })),
          }, null, 2),
        }],
      };
    }
  • src/index.ts:381-393 (registration)
    Tool registration in the TOOLS array, including name, description, and input schema requiring artistId.
      name: "lidarr_get_albums",
      description: "Get albums for an artist in Lidarr. Shows which albums are available and which are missing.",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object" as const,
        properties: {
          artistId: {
            type: "number",
            description: "Artist ID to get albums for",
          },
        },
        required: ["artistId"],
      },
    },
  • TypeScript interface defining the structure of Lidarr Album objects returned by the API.
    export interface Album {
      id: number;
      title: string;
      disambiguation: string;
      overview: string;
      artistId: number;
      foreignAlbumId: string;
      monitored: boolean;
      anyReleaseOk: boolean;
      profileId: number;
      duration: number;
      albumType: string;
      genres: string[];
      images: Array<{ coverType: string; url: string }>;
      links: Array<{ url: string; name: string }>;
      statistics?: {
        trackFileCount: number;
        trackCount: number;
        totalTrackCount: number;
        sizeOnDisk: number;
        percentOfTracks: number;
      };
      releaseDate: string;
      releases: Array<{
        id: number;
        albumId: number;
        foreignReleaseId: string;
        title: string;
        status: string;
        duration: number;
        trackCount: number;
        monitored: boolean;
      }>;
      grabbed: boolean;
    }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool 'Get[s] albums' and 'Shows which albums are available and which are missing', which implies a read-only operation that returns status information. However, it doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether this requires authentication, rate limits, error conditions, response format, or pagination. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is appropriately sized with two concise sentences that front-load the core purpose ('Get albums for an artist in Lidarr') followed by additional context ('Shows which albums are available and which are missing'). There's no wasted verbiage, and each sentence adds value. It could be slightly improved by integrating the two ideas more seamlessly, but it's efficient overall.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's low complexity (1 required parameter, no nested objects, no output schema), the description is adequate but incomplete. It covers the basic purpose and output intent (availability status), but lacks details on behavioral aspects (e.g., authentication, errors) and doesn't leverage the absence of an output schema to explain return values. For a simple read operation, this is minimally sufficient but leaves gaps an agent might need.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% (the 'artistId' parameter is fully described in the schema as 'Artist ID to get albums for'), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides—it doesn't explain where to find the artistId, its format, or validation rules. Thus, it meets the minimum viable level without enhancing parameter understanding.

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 tool's purpose: 'Get albums for an artist in Lidarr' specifies the verb ('Get'), resource ('albums'), and scope ('for an artist in Lidarr'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'lidarr_get_artists' (which gets artists, not albums) and 'lidarr_search_missing' (which searches for missing items, not listing all albums). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'lidarr_search_album' (which might search for specific albums rather than list all for an artist), preventing a perfect score.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage context: 'Shows which albums are available and which are missing' suggests this tool is for inventory/status checking rather than searching or downloading. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this vs. alternatives like 'lidarr_search_album' or 'lidarr_search_missing', and doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., requires an existing artist ID). This leaves room for ambiguity in tool selection.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/aplaceforallmystuff/mcp-arr'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server