Skip to main content
Glama
mikeysrecipes

TIDAL MCP: My Custom Picks

tidal_login

Authenticate with TIDAL to enable personalized music recommendations and playlist management through browser login.

Instructions

Authenticate with TIDAL through browser login flow.
This will open a browser window for the user to log in to their TIDAL account.

Returns:
    A dictionary containing authentication status and user information if successful

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The MCP tool handler for 'tidal_login', decorated with @mcp.tool(). It handles authentication by making a GET request to the Flask app's /api/auth/login endpoint and returns success or error status.
    @mcp.tool()
    def tidal_login() -> dict:
        """
        Authenticate with TIDAL through browser login flow.
        This will open a browser window for the user to log in to their TIDAL account.
        
        Returns:
            A dictionary containing authentication status and user information if successful
        """
        try:
            # Call your Flask endpoint for TIDAL authentication
            response = requests.get(f"{FLASK_APP_URL}/api/auth/login")
            
            # Check if the request was successful
            if response.status_code == 200:
                return response.json()
            else:
                error_data = response.json()
                return {
                    "status": "error",
                    "message": f"Authentication failed: {error_data.get('message', 'Unknown error')}"
                }
        except Exception as e:
            return {
                "status": "error",
                "message": f"Failed to connect to TIDAL authentication service: {str(e)}"
            }
  • The @mcp.tool() decorator registers the tidal_login function as an MCP tool.
    @mcp.tool()
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well by disclosing key behavioral traits: it opens a browser window (interactive user flow), describes the authentication process, and mentions what gets returned. However, it doesn't cover potential failure modes, timeout behavior, or whether authentication persists across sessions.

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 perfectly sized with three sentences that each earn their place: first states the purpose and method, second explains the user interaction, third describes the return value. It's front-loaded with the core functionality and wastes no 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?

For an authentication tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides good coverage of what the tool does and what it returns. However, it could be more complete by addressing error cases, whether authentication is persistent, and how this tool relates to the sibling tools that presumably require authentication.

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 parameters and 100% schema coverage, the baseline would be 4. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters since there are none, and instead focuses on the tool's behavior and return values, which is the correct approach for a parameterless tool.

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 specific action ('Authenticate with TIDAL') and method ('through browser login flow'), distinguishing it from all sibling tools which perform data operations rather than authentication. It precisely communicates what the tool does without being vague or tautological.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description implicitly indicates this should be used for initial authentication ('Authenticate with TIDAL'), but doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or mention alternatives. It provides clear context about the authentication flow but lacks explicit guidance about prerequisites or when to choose this over other authentication methods.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/mikeysrecipes/tidal-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server