Remove tracks from a Spotify playlist by providing the playlist ID and an array of track IDs. This tool lets you delete specific songs from a playlist.
Remove tracks from a playlist
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| trackIds | Yes | Array of Spotify track IDs to remove | |
| playlistId | Yes | Spotify ID of the playlist |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.7.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses nothing. For a mutation tool it does not say whether removals are permanent, whether the track IDs must already exist in the playlist, what happens with invalid IDs, or what authorization is needed.
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 single five-word sentence is front-loaded and contains no filler. It is arguably too terse for a mutation tool, but it is structurally clean and wastes nothing.
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?
With no annotations, no output schema, and a mutation operation, the description should cover reversibility, error behavior, and relationship to sibling playlist tools. It covers none of these, leaving significant gaps for an agent to guess at.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so both playlistId and trackIds are already documented in the schema. The description adds no format, ordering, batch-size, or constraint detail 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.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a clear verb and resource ('Remove tracks from a playlist'), so the purpose is unambiguous. However, it is essentially a plain-English restatement of the tool name and offers no differentiation from siblings like add-tracks-to-playlist, reorder-playlist-tracks, or delete-playlist.
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?
There is no when-to-use guidance, no stated prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as reorder-playlist-tracks or delete-playlist. The agent must infer when this is the right call from the name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.