Prezzinvista - Radar dei Volantini

Volantini in corso

list_current_flyers

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when the user asks which store flyers (volantini) are valid right now in Italy, whether a chain has a flyer this week, or until when a flyer is valid, optionally only for chains with a store near a city. Returns chain, validity dates, number of offers, distance of the nearest store and the link to the flyer on prezzinvista.it. Covers Italy only. Products inside the flyers are what search_flyer_offers looks up. In hosts that support MCP Apps the results are also shown to the user as cards with logo, validity and link.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`city`	No	Italian municipality (comune) to search around, e.g. "Milano", "Reggio Emilia", "Sesto San Giovanni". Only flyers valid in stores within 15 km are returned. Omit for all of Italy.
`limit`	No	Flyers to return (default 30). Nearest first with a city, largest first otherwise.
`store`	No	Only the flyers of this chain, by name: e.g. "Lidl".

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`city`	No
`flyers`	Yes
`source`	No	Who to credit for the data
`source_url`	No	The page on prezzinvista.it with these flyers and their offers: the URL to cite
`updated_at`	No	When the flyers were last read (ISO 8601). They are read again every three hours
`total_flyers`	Yes
`total_offers`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 5, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / source_url

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The page on prezzinvista.it with these flyers and their offers: the URL to cite",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedOct 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds real value beyond that with the Italy-only boundary, the default 30 / nearest-first ordering behavior, and the MCP Apps card rendering in capable hosts. It does not discuss rate limits or failure modes, which keeps it from a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the usage trigger, then capabilities, then scope, then sibling routing; every sentence carries information. It is on the denser side and the output-fields sentence overlaps with the existing output schema, but there is no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema present, enumerating return fields is optional; the description nonetheless frames the result shape and adds the geographic scope and host-dependent card behavior an agent needs to set user expectations. Nothing required to invoke it correctly is missing given the rich schema and annotations.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and each parameter already documents its own format, defaults, limits and the 15 km radius rule, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only echoes the city/chain filtering at a high level ('optionally only for chains with a store near a city'), adding no syntax or format detail beyond the schema — baseline 3.

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?

States a concrete verb+resource (lists store flyers valid right now) and scopes it to Italy, and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling search_flyer_offers by noting that flyer products are that tool's job. An agent can pick between the two without opening a schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Opens with explicit trigger conditions ('when the user asks which flyers are valid right now', 'whether a chain has a flyer this week', 'until when a flyer is valid') and names the alternative tool for the adjacent product-level question. When-to-use and when-to-use-something-else are both covered.

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

All Prezzinvista - Radar dei Volantini tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?