Spotify MCP Server

by llyfn

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Remote

add_to_queue

Add a track or episode to the current playback queue using its Spotify URI. Optionally specify a device.

Instructions

Add a track or episode to the playback queue.

    Args:
        uri: Spotify URI of the item to add. E.g. "spotify:track:xxx".
        device_id: ID of the device. If not provided, uses the active device.

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": {
      "uri": "<uri>"
    },
    "name": "add_to_queue"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`uri`	Yes
`device_id`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1May 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states that items are added to the queue but does not disclose important behavioral details such as whether items are appended or replaced, error handling, or authentication requirements, which are critical for a mutation tool.

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 extremely concise, using two sentences to convey the purpose and parameter details without waste. Every sentence earns its 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?

Given that an output schema exists, the description does not need to explain return values. However, it omits details like behavioral behavior (e.g., appending to queue end) and error conditions, making it minimally adequate for a simple tool but not robust.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the tool description adds valuable context: it provides an example URI format for 'uri' and explains that 'device_id' defaults to the active device. This meaningfully augments the bare schema.

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 action ('Add'), the resource ('track or episode'), and the target ('playback queue'), with a specific verb and resource that distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'add_playlist_items' and 'play'.

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 explains the parameters (uri and device_id) but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'play' or 'add_playlist_items'. The usage is implied but not elaborated.

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