Skip to main content
Glama

vibo_export_event_to_spotify

Export an event's song selections to a new Spotify playlist. After confirmation, returns the playlist URL and how many tracks were exported or failed.

Instructions

Export an event's song selections to a new Spotify playlist (Spotify must be connected). Returns the playlist URL plus how many tracks exported / failed. 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).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleNoPlaylist title (defaults to the event title).
eventIdYesEvent id.
sectionIdsYesSection ids to include (from vibo_list_sections).
onlyFlaggedNoExport only flagged/do-not-play songs (rarely needed).
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 changedv2.3.1
    • 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 changedv2.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  3. Addedv1.5.3
  4. Removedv1.5.1
  5. First observedv1.3.1

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the mutation nature is known. The description adds valuable context: it explains the two-step confirmation fallback with a confirmToken, references MCP_CONFIRM_MODE, and discloses that a preview is returned on the first call. This goes beyond the annotation hints and gives the agent a clear mental model of the call sequence.

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 two sentences, with the core purpose front-loaded. The second sentence is long because it must explain the confirmation protocol, but every part earns its place. It is not overly verbose and avoids redundancy with the schema, so it achieves good structure and efficiency.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the complexity of the confirmation flow and the absence of an output schema, the description fully covers what an agent needs to call this correctly: it states prerequisites, return values (URL and counts), and the two-step confirmation mechanism with clear instructions on when to pass confirmToken. It also references MCP_CONFIRM_MODE for further context, leaving no critical gap.

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 coverage is 100%, so every parameter already has a description. The tool description adds little beyond what the schema provides; the only extra is a brief mention of sectionIds sourcing from vibo_list_sections (already in the schema) and the confirmToken flow (also described in the schema at length). Thus the description does not meaningfully augment parameter semantics beyond the structured data.

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 starts with a specific verb-resource pair: 'Export an event's song selections to a new Spotify playlist.' This clearly distinguishes it from the Apple Music sibling (vibo_export_event_to_apple_music) by naming the target platform. It also states what the tool returns (URL, counts) and the confirmation flow, leaving no ambiguity about its function.

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?

The description specifies a prerequisite ('Spotify must be connected') and details the confirmation flow, but it does not explicitly contrast with the Apple Music sibling. However, by naming Spotify in the purpose, it implicitly guides the agent to use this tool when Spotify is the target, which is sufficient for a competent agent given the sibling list.

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