mcp-server
Server Details
Read-only MCP server for Muovi, Argentina's trust-first local services marketplace (6 tools).
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
- Repository
- mmiani/mcp-server
- GitHub Stars
- 1
- Server Listing
- @muovi/mcp-server
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.6/5 across 6 of 6 tools scored.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: generating deep links, fetching professional profiles, reviews, listing cities and services, and searching professionals. No overlap or ambiguity.
All tools follow a consistent 'muovi_verb_noun' snake_case pattern (e.g., muovi_search_professionals, muovi_list_cities), making it predictable.
Six tools cover the necessary operations for a service professional platform without being excessive or insufficient. Each tool serves a clear need.
The tool set covers discovery (search, list cities/services), detailed information (professional, reviews), and the intended action (deep link for task creation). The lack of server-side task creation is by design, so the surface is complete.
Available Tools
6 toolsmuovi_create_task_linkCreate task deep-linkARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Build the canonical Muovi deep-link that opens the on-platform task creation flow pre-filled with a specific professional and service. Returns a URL of the form https://muovi.com.ar/p/{slug}?create_task=1&service={service-slug}. This is a pure formatter — it makes no network call and creates no task. After running it, surface the URL to the user so they can complete the booking on Muovi. Muovi never lets agents create tasks server-side; the consumer always sees the on-platform flow to confirm details.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| service_slug | Yes | The service slug to pre-fill in the task flow (from `muovi_list_services`). | |
| professional_slug | Yes | The professional's URL-safe slug (from `muovi_search_professionals` or `muovi_get_professional`). |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral context: no network call, no task creation, and the user completes the flow. This reinforces and elaborates on the annotation hints.
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 concise (~6 sentences), well-structured, and front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence adds meaningful information with no redundancy.
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?
Despite no output schema, the description provides the exact URL format. For a simple formatter with clear annotations and two well-documented parameters, the description covers all necessary context: what it does, what it returns, and its side-effect-free nature.
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?
Input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters. The description adds value by specifying data sources for slugs (e.g., 'from muovi_list_services'), which is helpful context beyond the schema.
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 clearly states the tool builds a Muovi deep-link URL pre-filled with a professional and service slug, using specific verbs 'Build' and 'Returns'. It is distinct from sibling tools which are all read-only data retrieval or search tools.
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 explicitly says 'This is a pure formatter — it makes no network call and creates no task' and instructs to 'surface the URL to the user so they can complete the booking on Muovi'. It explains the server-side creation restriction. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or give alternatives, though siblings are clearly different.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
muovi_get_professionalGet professionalARead-onlyInspect
Fetch the full public profile for a single Muovi-verified professional by slug. Returns display name, headline, bio, portfolio image URLs, specialties, city + neighborhoods, services, ratings, verifications, and the canonical profile_url. The profile_url is the only sanctioned contact channel — phone, email, and whatsapp are never returned. Append ?create_task=1&service={slug} to profile_url (or use muovi_create_task_link) to deep-link a user into the on-platform task creation flow targeted at this pro.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | The professional's URL-safe slug (e.g. "juan-p-electricista-caba"). Obtain from `muovi_search_professionals`. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: it enumerates the exact fields returned, explicitly states that phone/email/whatsapp are never returned, and explains the sanctioned contact channel. It also notes the read-only nature (consistent with readOnlyHint) and the open-world hint (profile_url may contain additional parameters). No contradiction with annotations.
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 concise yet comprehensive, with each sentence serving a distinct purpose: stating the action, listing outputs, clarifying contact policy, and providing usage guidance. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and avoids redundancy.
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 low complexity (single parameter, no output schema), the description fully covers what the tool does, what it returns, and how to use the result. The agent has all necessary information to select and invoke the tool correctly.
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 coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'slug'. The description adds value by providing a concrete example of the slug format and explicitly stating where to obtain it (from muovi_search_professionals), which aids correct invocation beyond the schema's description.
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 uses specific verb 'Fetch' and resource 'full public profile', clearly identifying the tool's action and input (slug). It distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying that it returns detailed profile data for a single professional, unlike muovi_search_professionals which returns search results.
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 clearly indicates when to use this tool (to get a professional's profile by slug). It also provides context on how to use the output (e.g., deep-linking via profile_url), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives beyond muovi_create_task_link.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
muovi_get_reviewsGet reviewsARead-onlyInspect
Fetch paginated reviews for a single Muovi-verified professional, sorted most-recent first. Each review has a 1-5 rating, an optional title and free-text comment, the author's reduced display name (e.g. "María G." — full surnames are never returned), the author role (client or worker), the service category the review is associated with, and an ISO created_at timestamp. Use this to surface social-proof when recommending a professional.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | The professional's URL-safe slug. Obtain from `muovi_search_professionals` or `muovi_get_professional`. | |
| limit | No | Maximum number of reviews per page (default 20, max 50). | |
| offset | No | Zero-based offset into the review list for pagination. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds detail: sorting, field names, author display format, pagination. It does not contradict annotations and provides useful behavioral context beyond the structured fields.
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 sentence that efficiently conveys purpose, behavior, and field details. It is front-loaded with the action, but could be slightly more structured (e.g., breaking into bullet points) for even easier parsing.
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 no output schema, the description covers key fields, sorting, and pagination. It could mention total count or next-page indicator, but for a simple paginated list it is adequately complete.
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 coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions. The description adds value by explaining how to obtain the slug, and clarifying limit and offset are for pagination. This goes beyond the schema baseline.
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 clearly states the tool fetches paginated reviews for a single professional, sorted most-recent first. It distinguishes itself from siblings like muovi_get_professional and muovi_search_professionals by focusing on reviews.
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 gives a specific use case: 'surface social-proof when recommending a professional.' It mentions obtaining the slug from other tools, providing indirect guidance. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool references.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
muovi_list_citiesList citiesARead-onlyInspect
List every Argentine city Muovi serves, with active neighborhoods nested under each. Each city has a stable slug (used as the city parameter on muovi_search_professionals) and a human-readable name. Each neighborhood has its own slug (used as the neighborhood parameter on muovi_search_professionals). Call this when you need to resolve a user's location wording to a Muovi city or neighborhood slug.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds context about the data structure (cities with neighborhoods, slugs vs names) and how the output relates to other tools, going beyond the annotations.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and every sentence adds value. No wasted words.
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?
For a parameterless tool with no output schema, the description fully explains the purpose, usage, and how the output integrates with sibling tools. It is complete and self-sufficient.
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?
No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds value by explaining the return structure and the meaning of slugs and names, even though the output schema is absent. Baseline of 4 is appropriate.
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 clearly states the tool lists Argentine cities with nested neighborhoods, and distinguishes it from siblings by explaining the slug usage for other tools like muovi_search_professionals.
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 explicitly says when to call this tool: 'when you need to resolve a user's location wording to a Muovi city or neighborhood slug.' It does not provide explicit when-not-to-use guidance but the context is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
muovi_list_servicesList servicesARead-onlyInspect
List every service category Muovi supports in Argentina (electricidad, plomería, pintura, etc.). Each entry has a stable slug (used as the service parameter on muovi_search_professionals and muovi_create_task_link), a human-readable name, an optional description, and a requires_matricula flag indicating whether listed professionals must hold a verified professional license. Call this first when you need to map a user's natural-language request to a Muovi service slug.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds transparency by detailing the output structure (stable slug, human-readable name, optional description, requires_matricula flag) and the purpose (mapping requests). No contradictions. Could mention if an empty list is possible, but overall good.
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?
Two sentences with no filler, front-loaded with the core purpose, and structured to first state what the tool does then explain the output fields.
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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, output structure, and usage context. The annotations further support the understanding.
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?
No parameters exist, so baseline is 4. The description adequately explains the purpose without needing parameter details.
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 clearly states what the tool does: lists every service category Muovi supports in Argentina, with specific fields (slug, name, description, requires_matricula). It distinguishes itself from siblings by explaining that the slug is used as a parameter in other tools like muovi_search_professionals and muovi_create_task_link.
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?
Explicitly advises to call this first when mapping a user's natural-language request to a Muovi service slug, providing clear context on when to use it versus alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
muovi_search_professionalsSearch professionalsARead-onlyInspect
Search for verified service professionals in Argentina by service type, city, neighborhood, verification status, minimum rating, and minimum review count. Returns a paginated list of professionals with display name, headline, ratings, verifications, and a profile_url that is the only sanctioned contact channel (no phone/email/whatsapp is ever returned). Use this for discovery; use muovi_get_professional for the full detail payload.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| city | No | City slug (e.g. "caba"). Matches `City.slug` in the catalog. | |
| limit | No | Maximum number of results per page (default 20, max 50). | |
| offset | No | Zero-based offset into the result set for pagination. | |
| service | No | Service slug (e.g. "electricidad"). Matches `Service.slug` in the catalog. | |
| min_rating | No | Minimum blended average rating, 0-5 inclusive. | |
| min_reviews | No | Minimum blended review count. | |
| neighborhood | No | Neighborhood slug (e.g. "palermo"). Matches `Neighborhood.slug` in the catalog. | |
| has_matricula | No | When true, only return pros with a verified professional matrícula on file (electricians, gas fitters, etc.). | |
| verified_identity | No | When true, only return pros whose identity has been verified by Muovi. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Beyond readOnlyHint annotation, adds that returned data includes specific fields (display name, headline, ratings, verifications, profile_url) and emphasizes that no contact info is ever returned. This adds context about side effects and output constraints.
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?
Two sentences: first covers purpose and filters, second covers return fields and usage guidance. Every word adds value, no redundancy.
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 9 parameters, no output schema, and readOnlyHint+openWorldHint annotations, the description fully equips an agent to decide when and how to use the tool. Includes restrictions, contact policy, and sibling differentiation.
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 coverage is 100% with good parameter descriptions. The description enumerates filter categories but does not add significant new semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
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?
Clearly states it searches for verified service professionals with multiple filters. Distinguishes from sibling by specifying discovery vs. full detail via muovi_get_professional.
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?
Explicitly says use for discovery and mentions alternative muovi_get_professional for full detail. Also notes what is not returned (phone/email/whatsapp) and that profile_url is the only contact channel.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Your Connectors
Sign in to create a connector for this server.