Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
UnClick MCP Server

UnClick MCP Server

by malamutemayhem
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

setlistfm_search_artist

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search Setlist.fm for an artist by name to find matching artist records for setlist lookups and concert data workflows.

Instructions

Search for an artist on Setlist.fm.

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": {
      "artistName": "<artistName>"
    },
    "name": "setlistfm_search_artist"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
api_keyNo
artistNameYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.1.5

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds nothing further: no result shape, no pagination, no fuzzy-vs-exact matching behaviour, and no mention that an api_key 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.

Conciseness3/5

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

A single short sentence with no wasted words, but the terseness leaves the definition under-specified rather than efficiently informative.

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?

For a two-parameter, zero-coverage search tool with no output schema, the description leaves the agent guessing about the api_key, matching semantics, and what a hit looks like. Substantially more is needed for correct invocation.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the parameter burden and it doesn't. 'artistName' is only implicitly referenced by the word 'artist', and the required api_key parameter is never mentioned at all.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (search) and resource (artist) scoped to Setlist.fm, which is enough to distinguish it from most of the catalogue. It does not contrast with its real neighbours setlistfm_search_setlists or setlistfm_artist_setlists, so the differentiation is only partial.

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 indication of when to use this versus the sibling setlist tools (e.g. searching artists vs. retrieving an artist's setlists). The agent must infer the workflow from names alone.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools