Retrieve an artist's Spotify profile, including name, genres, popularity, and images. Use this to access artist details for music analysis or recommendations.
Get an artist's profile (name, genres, popularity, images).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| artist_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool is a read operation ('Get') but doesn't disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or what happens if the artist_id is invalid. The output schema exists but the description adds no behavioral context beyond the verb.
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?
The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then lists the key return fields. Every word earns its place; no filler or repetition.
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?
The output schema exists, so return values are covered. However, with no annotations and no parameter explanation, the description is incomplete for an agent that needs to know how to construct a valid call (e.g., what artist_id format is expected). It's adequate for a simple lookup but leaves gaps.
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 0%, and the description does not explain the artist_id parameter beyond its name. The description mentions the profile fields but doesn't clarify the format or source of artist_id (e.g., Spotify ID vs. URL). With only one parameter, the description should have compensated but didn't.
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?
The description states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('artist's profile'), and lists the fields returned (name, genres, popularity, images). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_artist_top_tracks and get_artist_albums, though it doesn't explicitly name them.
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?
The description implies usage: call this when you need an artist's profile details. It doesn't explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like get_artist_top_tracks or get_related_artists, but the field list (name, genres, popularity, images) provides enough context for an agent to infer the right scenario.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.