Spotify MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

reorder_playlist_items

Rearrange items in a Spotify playlist by specifying the starting position, target insertion point, and number of items to move.

Instructions

Reorder items in a playlist.

    Args:
        playlist_id: The Spotify ID of the playlist.
        range_start: Position of the first item to be reordered.
        insert_before: Position where the items should be inserted.
        range_length: Number of items to reorder (default 1).

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>",
      "range_start": "<range_start>",
      "insert_before": "<insert_before>"
    },
    "name": "reorder_playlist_items"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`playlist_id`	Yes
`range_start`	Yes
`range_length`	No
`insert_before`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1May 5, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the operation is destructive, requires authentication, or has side effects. It only lists parameters.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is concise, with a docstring format listing parameters without extra fluff. However, the initial sentence rephrases the tool name without adding new insight, and the structure could be more front-loaded.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the moderate complexity (4 parameters, no annotations, output schema present but not described), the description lacks context on the effect of reordering, return value, and usage constraints. It is incomplete for effective agent invocation.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so description compensates with brief explanations for each parameter (e.g., 'Position of the first item to be reordered'). However, details like 0-indexing or valid ranges are missing, so only marginal added value.

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 ('Reorder items in a playlist') and the resource ('playlist'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_playlist_items and remove_playlist_items.

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 (e.g., add_playlist_items, remove_playlist_items), nor any prerequisites or context-specific usage notes.

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