Spotify MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

remove_playlist_items

Remove specific tracks or episodes from a Spotify playlist by providing playlist ID and URIs. Handles bulk removal in chunks of 100 items per request.

Instructions

Remove tracks or episodes from a playlist. Auto-chunks at 100 items per request.

    Args:
        playlist_id: The Spotify ID of the playlist.
        uris: List of Spotify URIs to remove (e.g. ["spotify:track:xxx"]).

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>",
      "uris": "<uris>"
    },
    "name": "remove_playlist_items"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`uris`	Yes
`playlist_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1May 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Discloses auto-chunking at 100 items per request, which is a key behavior. However, without annotations, it omits details like permission requirements, reversibility, or error handling.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences and an arg list. Each sentence adds value: action, auto-chunking, parameter explanations. 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 the core action and parameter meanings. Output schema exists so return details are not needed. Missing access requirements or ownership context, but otherwise complete for a simple removal tool.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description explains both parameters: playlist_id as 'The Spotify ID' and uris with example. Adds clarity beyond schema, but lacks format constraints or limits.

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?

Clearly states it removes tracks or episodes from a playlist, using specific verb 'remove' and resource 'playlist items'. Distinguishes from siblings like add_playlist_items and remove_from_library.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as remove_from_library or update_playlist. The description only states the action without context for selection.

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