Plays your Liked Songs from Spotify, shuffled by default or in order when shuffle is false, with an optional device ID to target playback.
Play the user's Liked Songs (their favourites), shuffled unless shuffle=false.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| shuffle | No | Default true. | |
| device_id | No | Optional device ID from get_devices. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the shuffle-by-default behavior, but says nothing about device requirements, whether playback starts immediately, or what happens when no active device exists.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single tight sentence with the resource named first and the default behavior appended. Nothing is wasted and no sentence needs reordering.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Adequate for a two-boolean/string playback tool with no output schema, but for a mutation-like action with zero annotations the definition should say more about device targeting and precondition failures.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented; baseline is 3. The description restates the shuffle default rather than adding new semantics, and device_id is not addressed at all.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb (Play) and resource (the user's Liked Songs, glossed as 'favourites'), which cleanly separates it from the generic `play` and from listing tools like `get_saved_tracks`. It does not explicitly name a sibling, so it falls short of full differentiation.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer this over `play` with an explicit context, and no prerequisites such as needing an active device. The reader must infer all routing from the name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.