Spotify MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

get_playlist

Retrieve details of a Spotify playlist, including metadata and the first 20 tracks. Requires a playlist ID; optionally specify a market for track availability.

Instructions

Get details of a Spotify playlist.

    Shows playlist metadata plus the first 20 tracks. For more tracks or
    pagination, use `get_playlist_items`.

    Args:
        playlist_id: The Spotify ID of the playlist.
        market: ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code; affects track availability.

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": {
      "playlist_id": "<playlist_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_playlist"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`market`	No
`playlist_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.2.0Jun 9, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / market

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Market"
+}

First observedv0.1.1May 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the 20-track limit and implicitly indicates read-only behavior, but could mention OAuth requirements or 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is concise, front-loaded with purpose, then a critical limitation, and clear parameter explanations with no wasted words.

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?

Covers essential aspects (purpose, behavior, parameters) and leverages the output schema for return values. Minor gap: default behavior of market parameter not explained.

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

Parameters5/5

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

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description fully explains both parameters: playlist_id as the Spotify ID and market as an ISO country code affecting track availability.

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 retrieves Spotify playlist details, including metadata and first 20 tracks, and distinguishes it from the sibling get_playlist_items by noting the pagination limit.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly tells the agent when to use an alternative: 'For more tracks or pagination, use get_playlist_items', providing clear guidance for tool selection.

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