Retrieve all Spotify playback devices available to the authenticated account. Use it to identify where audio can be played before sending playback commands.
Lista los dispositivos Spotify disponibles.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read-only listing operation but does not disclose authorization requirements, whether it returns only currently available devices, or any other behavioral trait such as ordering or rate limits.
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, well-formed sentence that front-loads the purpose with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple listing tool.
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?
Given the tool's simplicity, zero parameters, and the presence of an output schema, the description does not need to explain return values. It adequately identifies the action, though additional usage context would improve completeness.
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?
The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly does not introduce any parameter semantics, and the empty schema is fully consistent with a no-argument listing tool.
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 ('Lista') and resource ('dispositivos Spotify disponibles') and is clearly distinct from sibling tools, which handle tracks, playlists, and playback control rather than device listing. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings or clarify scope beyond listing.
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?
There is no guidance on when to call this tool versus alternatives, no mention of prerequisites, and no indication of what context makes this useful (e.g., before playback when no active device exists). The description simply states the action.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.