Skip to main content
Glama

Search YouTube Music songs

search_songs
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search for songs by query to retrieve matching IDs, artists, album titles, durations, and links.

Instructions

Find songs with IDs, artists, album titles, durations, and links.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
queryYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tracksYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.3.0
    • addedOutput schema / $defs / TrackResult / properties / album
      Added value: +{
      +  "anyOf": [
      +    {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    }
      +  ],
      +  "title": "Album"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / $defs / TrackResult / properties / duration_seconds
      Added value: +{
      +  "anyOf": [
      +    {
      +      "type": "integer"
      +    },
      +    {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    }
      +  ],
      +  "title": "Duration Seconds"
      +}
    • changedOutput schema / $defs / TrackResult / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "videoId",
      -  "title",
      -  "artists",
      -  "duration",
      -  "url"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "videoId",
      +  "title",
      +  "artists",
      +  "album",
      +  "duration",
      +  "duration_seconds",
      +  "url"
      +]
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=true, openWorld=true, idempotent=true, and destructive=false, covering safety and side effects. The description adds valuable context about the return fields (IDs, artists, album titles, durations, links), which is beyond what annotations provide. No contradictions exist.

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 a single, tight sentence that states the core function and the data provided. No filler or redundancy; it is front-loaded with the action and resource.

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?

Given a simple search tool with an output schema (present but not shown) and clear annotations, the description covers the essential purpose and returned data. It does not detail pagination or result count, but the presence of an output schema and annotations make this unnecessary. It is adequate for a tool of this complexity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description does not explain the meaning of 'query' or 'limit'. While 'query' is intuitively a search string, 'limit' is not described (e.g., max results). The description only lists output fields, not input semantics, so it fails to compensate for the empty schema descriptions.

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 begins with a specific verb ('Find') and a defined resource ('songs') plus the key data returned (IDs, artists, album titles, durations, links). It unambiguously separates this from sibling tools that generate radios or playlists, so an agent knows exactly what this tool accomplishes.

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 implies the use case (searching for songs) and the sibling tools are so distinct (radio/playlist creation) that no explicit when-not guidance is necessary. An agent can infer this is the tool for song discovery without ambiguity, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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