crates-music-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

create_kugou_playlist

Create a real Kugou Music playlist from a songs JSON list by resolving each track through Kugou search, then adding it to a new playlist with optional name, count, date, and avoid-days settings.

Instructions

Create a real Kugou Music playlist.

Same arguments and same contract as create_qq_playlist; songs are resolved through Kugou search, then added to a new playlist.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "songs_json": "<songs_json>"
    },
    "name": "create_kugou_playlist"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	No
`count`	No
`prompt`	No
`avoid_days`	No
`songs_json`	Yes
`playlist_name`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Nov 9, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that songs are resolved through Kugou search before being added and that the playlist is 'real' (a genuine external write), but it omits auth/cookie prerequisites, what happens to songs that fail resolution, whether repeat calls create duplicates, and rate limits.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the outcome and the equivalence to the QQ variant. Nothing is padded, though the deferral phrasing shifts substantial explanatory work onto another tool rather than earning its own place.

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

Completeness3/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but with six undocumented parameters, no annotations, and a real external write, the description should state auth needs and at least clarify the non-required parameters. The reliance on another tool's contract is a reasonable shortcut but not self-sufficient.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% across six parameters, and the description explains none of them. It only implies that songs_json is a list of songs resolved via Kugou search, while date, count, prompt, avoid_days, and playlist_name are left entirely to the referenced create_qq_playlist contract, which the agent may not have loaded.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Create a real Kugou Music playlist') and immediately scopes it against the sibling create_qq_playlist, so the agent knows this is the Kugou counterpart. The differentiation is done by cross-reference rather than by describing its own behavior, which keeps it just short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use or when-not guidance: nothing says when to prefer this over create_daily_playlist, create_ncm_playlist, or add_songs_to_playlist. The pointer to create_qq_playlist is a contract reference, not a selection rule, so the agent is left to infer routing from sibling names alone.

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