Cinve

Listar ciudades

list_cities

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves cities offered by a cinema provider for use in venue or showtime queries; supports name filtering and pagination.

Instructions

Lista ciudades del proveedor. Usa sus nombres al consultar Cines Unidos.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "provider": "<provider>"
    },
    "name": "list_cities"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No
`query`	No	Filtra por nombre, sin distinguir tildes/mayúsculas.
`offset`	No
`refresh`	No	true: consulta al proveedor sin usar caché local; solicita revalidación HTTP. No garantiza que el proveedor haya actualizado su contenido.
`provider`	Yes	Proveedor de cine; obtén capacidades y limitaciones con list_providers.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`items`	Yes
`total`	Yes
`status`	Yes
`partial`	Yes
`sources`	Yes
`provider`	Yes
`timezone`	Yes
`warnings`	Yes
`queried_at`	Yes
`next_offset`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 11, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context of its own: no mention of pagination behavior, cache staleness semantics around the refresh flag, or that results are per-provider. The single-provider framing actively works against understanding the cross-provider behavior.

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?

Two short sentences with zero filler and the core action front-loaded. The second sentence is concise but arguably costs more in confusion than it earns, since it names one provider out of five.

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

Completeness2/5

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

An output schema exists so return values needn't be described, but for a tool with a required five-value provider enum, pagination, and a cache-bypass flag, the description leaves key invocation context to the schema. The Cines Unidos-only framing risks an agent under-using the tool for other providers.

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 coverage is 60%, with query, refresh and provider documented in-schema while limit and offset are undocumented. The description compensates for none of this: it never mentions paging, filtering, or cache-refresh semantics, and its only param-adjacent content ("del proveedor") merely restates that results are provider-scoped.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"Lista ciudades del proveedor" states a specific verb (list) and resource (cities) scoped to a provider, which distinguishes it well enough from list_cinemas/list_movies by resource type. It stops short of explicitly contrasting with those siblings, and the second sentence narrows attention to one provider, which blurs the stated scope.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The only guidance is "Usa sus nombres al consultar Cines Unidos", which is a note about how to reuse returned values downstream, not about when to call this tool versus alternatives. Nothing says the provider argument is mandatory or how to choose the right one, and the Cines Unidos reference is misleading given five provider options.

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

Deploy Server