Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

musicbrainz-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Browse MusicBrainz entities linked to another

musicbrainz_browse
Read-onlyIdempotent

List all entities of a chosen type directly linked to a MusicBrainz ID—e.g., releases by an artist or recordings on a release. Returns complete paged relationships, not fuzzy search matches.

Instructions

List all entities of one type directly linked to a given entity — e.g. every release by an artist (entity: "release", linkedBy: "artist", mbid: ), recordings on a release, releases in a collection, or events at a place. This is the complete, paged set for a relationship (unlike search, which ranks fuzzy matches). Use inc for extra detail and limit/offset to page (max 100/page). Read-only. Data from MusicBrainz (https://musicbrainz.org), the open music encyclopedia.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
incNoSubqueries to include, e.g. ["labels","recordings"]
mbidYesMBID of the linking entity
viewNoResponse shape: "compact" (default) drops fields the response already carries elsewhere; "full" returns every field this server understands. compact strips image/avatar URLs from the response; "full" returns MusicBrainz's payload untouched. No field projection: this server has no verified record of which MusicBrainz fields matter, and inventing one would risk dropping a field a caller needs.
limitNoMax results (1–100, default 25)
entityYesResult entity type to list
offsetNoResult offset for paging (default 0)
linkedByYesThe relationship to browse by (the linking entity type)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / view
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Response shape: \"compact\" (default) drops fields the response already carries elsewhere; \"full\" returns every field this server understands. compact strips image/avatar URLs from the response; \"full\" returns MusicBrainz's payload untouched. No field projection: this server has no verified record of which MusicBrainz fields matter, and inventing one would risk dropping a field a caller needs.",
+  "enum": [
+    "compact",
+    "full"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observedv0.2.2

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, open-world behavior, so the description only needs to add context. It adds that browse returns the complete paged set rather than a ranked subset, highlights paging limits, and notes the data source. It doesn't cover rate limits or error behavior, but the key behavioral trait—deterministic complete relationships—is disclosed.

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?

The description is a compact two-sentence definition with no fluff. The core action and examples are front-loaded, followed by the search distinction, paging usage, and data provenance. Every sentence contributes to selection or invocation.

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 7-parameter read-only tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description provides enough context for an agent to select and call it: purpose, examples, paging, read-only nature, and data source. It doesn't describe response shape in detail, but the absence of an output schema makes that less critical for invocation.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema covers 100% of parameters, so baseline is 3. The description goes beyond the schema by providing a concrete parameter mapping example (entity: 'release', linkedBy: 'artist', mbid: <artist>) and explaining that inc adds detail and limit/offset page. This clarifies how the three required parameters interrelate.

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 description opens with specific verb and resource: 'List all entities of one type directly linked to a given entity', including concrete examples like 'every release by an artist' and 'recordings on a release'. It clearly distinguishes this from musicbrainz_search, which 'ranks fuzzy matches', making the tool's unique role unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly says this is the 'complete, paged set for a relationship' and contrasts with 'search, which ranks fuzzy matches', telling the agent when to prefer browse over search. It also gives direct operational guidance: 'Use inc for extra detail and limit/offset to page (max 100/page).'

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools