mcp-spotify

by obrien-matthew

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

remove_tracks_from_playlist

Remove all occurrences of tracks from a Spotify playlist by providing track IDs or URIs, up to 100 per call.

Instructions

Remove tracks from a Spotify playlist.

Removes all occurrences of each track. Accepts track IDs or URIs (max 100 per call).

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>",
      "track_ids": "<track_ids>"
    },
    "name": "remove_tracks_from_playlist"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`track_ids`	Yes
`playlist_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions 'removes all occurrences' and a limit of 100 tracks, but omits side effects, response details, or permission requirements.

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?

Two concise sentences with no fluff. The key information is front-loaded: action, resource, and constraints.

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 a simple removal tool with two parameters and an output schema, the description covers the essentials. Minor gaps: no mention of ownership or whether the operation is irreversible.

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 must add meaning. It explains that 'track_ids' accept IDs or URIs (max 100) and implies 'playlist_id' is required. However, it doesn't detail format or validation rules.

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 'remove tracks' and the resource 'Spotify playlist', specifying that all occurrences are removed and providing input limits. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'add_tracks_to_playlist' or 'replace_playlist_tracks'.

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., 'replace_playlist_tracks'). It doesn't mention prerequisites like ownership or permissions.

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