Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
musicbrainz-mcp

musicbrainz-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Add or remove entities in a MusicBrainz collection

musicbrainz_modify_collection
DestructiveIdempotent

Add or remove releases, artists, and other MusicBrainz entities in your own collection after confirmation, using collection and entity MBIDs.

Instructions

Add or remove entities (releases, artists, recordings, release-groups, works, labels, places, areas, events) in one of YOUR MusicBrainz collections (needs OAuth: MUSICBRAINZ_OAUTH_* with the collection scope). Get the collection MBID from its URL (musicbrainz.org/collection/). Asks the user to confirm first: a confirmation prompt where the client supports one; otherwise the first call returns a preview and a confirmToken, and only a repeat call with that token proceeds (see MCP_CONFIRM_MODE). Nothing is changed before confirmation. Data from MusicBrainz (https://musicbrainz.org), the open music encyclopedia.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
mbidsYesMBIDs of the entities to add/remove
actionYesWhether to add to or remove from the collection
collectionYesMBID of the target collection
entityTypeYesPlural entity type the collection holds (e.g. "releases")
confirmTokenNoONLY for the two-step confirmation fallback (a client without MCP elicitation). The confirmToken from this same tool's phase-1 "confirmation-required" response, passed back ONLY after the user has seen that preview and explicitly approved it in chat — never on the first call, never invented, never reused. Call again with the same arguments. Ignored when the client supports elicitation.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.2.1
    • removedInput schema / properties / confirm
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Must be true to proceed. Without this, the tool returns a preview.",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / confirmToken
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "ONLY for the two-step confirmation fallback (a client without MCP elicitation). The confirmToken from this same tool's phase-1 \"confirmation-required\" response, passed back ONLY after the user has seen that preview and explicitly approved it in chat — never on the first call, never invented, never reused. Call again with the same arguments. Ignored when the client supports elicitation.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. 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"
  3. First observedv0.2.2

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true) by disclosing the confirmation protocol: a client-side prompt where supported, otherwise a two-phase preview/confirmToken flow with MCP_CONFIRM_MODE, plus the explicit guarantee that nothing is changed before confirmation. That is exactly the behavioral context an agent needs for a destructive write.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and prerequisite, then the confirmation flow. It loses a little efficiency by re-listing the entity types already present in the entityType enum and by appending a generic MusicBrainz attribution line.

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?

With no output schema, the description still explains the return shape of the fallback path (a preview plus confirmToken). Auth, target discovery, and confirmation semantics are all covered; the only mild gap is that the normal successful response is not characterized.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: the collection MBID comes from the collection URL, the confirmToken is a phase-1 artifact that must never be invented or reused, and the entityType enum is described as the collection's plural type. This clarifies usage beyond the field descriptions.

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?

States a specific verb pair (add/remove) and resource (entities in one of YOUR MusicBrainz collections), and enumerates the entity types. It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling submit_tags/submit_rating tools, which mutate different kinds of user data.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives concrete prerequisites and context: OAuth with the `collection` scope, and how to obtain the collection MBID from its URL. It doesn't name an alternative tool or state when not to use it, but the sibling set offers no close substitute, so the guidance is effectively complete for selection.

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