spotify-mcp

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It successfully discloses that filters use AND logic and that text matching is case-insensitive with partial matches. However, it omits whether the operation is read-only (implied by 'Query' but not stated) and lacks details on pagination behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is efficiently structured with a clear purpose statement followed by behavioral logic and a comprehensive Args list. No redundant text; the Args section format effectively conveys the necessary parameter information without waste.

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

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

Given the existence of an output schema, the brief mention of return values (tracks with URIs) is sufficient. The description adequately covers the 8 parameters and filtering logic, though mentioning how returned URIs connect to sibling tools like spotify_add_to_playlist would enhance completeness further.

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

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

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by documenting all 8 parameters, including data formats (YYYY-MM-DD), enum values for source ('liked', 'playlists', 'all'), and constraints (max 500). This adds critical semantic meaning entirely missing from the schema.

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

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

States it queries the synced library with filters and returns tracks with URIs, providing specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from general search tools like spotify_search, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from spotify_get_saved_tracks or spotify_find_song.

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

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

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like spotify_search (general Spotify search) or spotify_get_saved_tracks (simple retrieval). Missing explicit 'when to use' or 'when not to use' recommendations among the many sibling tools.

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