Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mixcloud-mcp-server

mixcloud-mcp-server

by muntag
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

oembed

Retrieve embed metadata for a Mixcloud show URL to get embeddable details and display information.

Instructions

oEmbed data for a Mixcloud show URL (https://www.mixcloud.com/...).

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": {
      "url": "<url>"
    },
    "name": "oembed"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden but says nothing about read-only behavior, whether the show must be public, rate limits, or failure modes for a malformed URL. Only the domain restriction ('Mixcloud show URL') is disclosed.

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?

A single compact sentence with the key qualifier (Mixcloud show URL) front-loaded and no filler. It is arguably too terse rather than bloated, which is a different problem than structure.

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 tool whose entire value is returning oEmbed payload fields (title, author, thumbnail, embed HTML), the description never says what comes back, and there is no output schema to fall back on. The input contract is minimally covered but the output side is absent.

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 the description must compensate for the single 'url' parameter. It does add real meaning by specifying the expected resource URL (a Mixcloud show URL) with a format hint, but gives no example value or constraints beyond that.

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?

Names a specific resource (oEmbed data) and the exact input (a Mixcloud show URL), so an agent can tell roughly what it returns. The verb is only implied and it never distinguishes itself from the sibling embed_html, which sounds like it may overlap.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisite conditions, and no mention of the sibling embed_html that an agent might reasonably confuse this with. Usage is entirely left to inference from the name.

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