Retrieve an artist's track count, total plays, albums, and top songs from your Apple Music library to analyze listening habits.
Everything about one artist in the library: track count, total plays, albums, top songs.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| artist | 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. 'Everything about one artist' is vague and doesn't specify whether it returns all tracks if no limit is given, what the top songs are based on, or any behavioral details like pagination or rate limits.
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?
Single sentence, front-loaded with the resource and lists key outputs. It's concise but could be more structured with separate when-to-use information.
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 no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage for parameters, the description is incomplete. It should explain the limit parameter and perhaps what 'everything' includes. For a stats tool, it lacks crucial details like whether results are paginated or what the response format is.
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 coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the 'limit' parameter at all. The word 'top songs' hints at a limit but doesn't clarify if 'limit' controls the number of top songs returned. The 'artist' parameter is obvious, but the other parameter is left undocumented.
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?
States a specific resource (artist) and enumerates the data returned (track count, total plays, albums, top songs). It's clear what the tool does, though it doesn't contrast with the sibling listening_stats, which likely also provides stats.
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?
No guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like listening_stats or search_library. An agent has to infer that this is for artist-specific statistics.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.