Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

vibo-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

vibo_list_song_ideas_songs

Read-only

List suggested songs in a song-idea collection to get song URLs, IDs, titles, and artists for adding to a section.

Instructions

List the suggested songs inside a song-idea collection (returns songUrl/viboSongId/title/artist to pass to vibo_add_song_to_section).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
skipNoNumber of items to skip, for paging (default 0).
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 Vibo's payload untouched. No field projection: this server has no verified record of which Vibo fields matter, and inventing one would risk dropping a field a caller needs.
limitNoMax items to return (default 20).
eventIdYesEvent id.
sectionIdYesSection id (from vibo_list_sections).
songIdeasIdYesThe _id from vibo_list_section_song_ideas.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.8.0
    • 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 Vibo's payload untouched. No field projection: this server has no verified record of which Vibo fields matter, and inventing one would risk dropping a field a caller needs.",
+  "enum": [
+    "compact",
+    "full"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Addedv1.5.3
  3. Removedv1.4.3
  4. First observedv1.3.1

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already communicates that this is a safe read operation. The description adds that it returns specific fields for downstream use, which is useful, but it does not disclose behavior such as pagination semantics, ordering, or response shape beyond the listed fields. With annotations covering the safety profile, this is adequate but not rich.

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 entire description is one sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then immediately states the return fields and their downstream purpose. There is no filler, repetition of schema details, or redundant annotation content.

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 read-only list tool with six parameters fully documented in the schema and no output schema, the description covers the essential return contract by naming the fields a caller needs. It could add ordering or pagination behavior, but the schema already documents skip/limit, and the readOnlyHint covers safety, so the definition is largely complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all six parameters are already documented with descriptions, including defaults and enum behavior. The description's mention of return fields does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('suggested songs inside a song-idea collection'), and adds the concrete return fields songUrl/viboSongId/title/artist. It does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling tools like vibo_list_section_song_ideas or vibo_get_section_songs, but 'song-idea collection' and 'suggested songs' make the target resource reasonably distinct.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The phrase 'to pass to vibo_add_song_to_section' implies a downstream use case, so an agent can infer when this tool is useful. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer sibling list tools, and no exclusions or alternatives.

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