@striderlabs/mcp-spotify

search_playlists

Find Spotify playlists by name or query, returning playlist name, owner, track count, and URI. Specify result limit to control output.

Instructions

Search for playlists on Spotify. Returns playlist name, owner, track count, and URI.

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "search_playlists"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	Number of results to return (1-50, default: 20)
`query`	Yes	Playlist name or search query (e.g., 'workout hits', 'jazz classics')

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 21, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

The description mentions the output fields but does not disclose details about the return structure, potential errors, authentication requirements, or rate limits. With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and falls short of fully informing the agent about behaviors.

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 and straightforward, consisting of two sentences that directly convey the purpose and output. No unnecessary fluff or redundancy is present.

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?

The description covers the core functionality and mentions the output fields, but it does not detail the exact JSON structure, pagination behavior, or error handling. Given the simplicity of the tool, this may be adequate but lacks completeness for a fully self-contained description.

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?

The parameter descriptions in the schema already cover the meaning of 'query' and 'limit'. The tool description does not add further clarification or constraints, so it provides no added value beyond what the schema already gives.

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's purpose: searching for playlists on Spotify. It also specifies the returned fields (name, owner, track count, URI), making it distinct from sibling search tools like search_artists or search_albums.

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?

The description does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives. While it is clear that it is for playlists, it lacks any mention of scenarios where this tool is preferred or not, which is important given the existence of sibling search tools.

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