Remove tracks by ID from an Apple Music playlist without deleting them from your library. Use it to edit playlists while keeping songs saved for later.
Remove tracks (by id) from a playlist. Does not delete them from the library.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| playlist | Yes | ||
| track_ids | 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 must carry the full behavioral burden. It explicitly states that tracks are not deleted from the library, which is critical non-obvious behavior. It does not mention whether the operation is idempotent, requires specific permissions, or what happens if track IDs are invalid, but the key side-effect distinction is covered.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the main action and immediately followed by the crucial side-effect clarification. No wasted words.
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?
Given a simple two-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential action and the key distinction from library deletion. It could be improved with brief info on failure modes or return values, but it is mostly complete.
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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It specifies that tracks are removed 'by id', which clarifies the expected format of track_ids, but does not elaborate on the playlist parameter (which is required but presumably a playlist identifier). Adequate but not rich.
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 verb (remove) and resource (tracks) and scope (from a playlist) with a clear contrast clause. It distinguishes itself from the likely sibling add_to_playlist and clarifies it is not a library deletion.
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?
The description clearly implies when to use it (removing tracks from a playlist) and clarifies the inverse of add_to_playlist, which is present in the sibling list. It lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternative tools like delete from library, but the scope is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.