Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
radio-browser-mcp

radio-browser-mcp

by cococolanosugar
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

next_station

Skip to the next popular radio station from the global top stations list. Each call advances to the next station in the cycle.

Instructions

Play the next popular station from Radio-Browser.

Cycles through the top global stations. Each call advances to the next one.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "next_station"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavior. It states the tool 'cycles through top global stations' and 'advances to the next one', but it does not clarify whether the cycle loops, what happens at the end of the list, or if there is any state persistence. This lack of detail is a significant gap for a tool with no annotations.

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 two concise sentences that front-load the purpose and avoid any filler. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool with no parameters and an output schema (which presumably describes the return value), the description covers the core action. However, it could mention the return value type or whether it plays immediately, but this is not essential given the output schema. Almost complete.

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?

The tool has no parameters, so the schema provides no semantic information. The description adds meaning by explaining that each call advances to the next station. This is sufficient, though the description could be more explicit about the cycle behavior. Baseline 4 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool plays the next popular station from Radio-Browser, with a specific verb ('play') and resource ('next popular station'). It distinguishes from siblings like play_station (plays a specific station) and random_station (plays a random station).

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 description implies usage for skipping to the next station in a cycle, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like play_station or random_station. There is no guidance on prerequisites or when not to use it.

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