Crawlora MCP

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

glovo_city

Retrieve a Glovo city's market settings—name, enabled status, supported languages, currency, and timezone—to validate availability and localize requests.

Instructions

Get one Glovo city's market settings. Returns one city's market settings: its name, whether it is enabled, the languages it supports (the values the language parameter of every Glovo endpoint accepts for that city), its currency and its timezone. A city or country Glovo does not serve returns a 400 pointing to /glovo/cities.

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": {
      "country": "<country>",
      "city": "<city>"
    },
    "name": "glovo_city"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`city`	Yes	City slug (madrid) or city code (mad), from /glovo/cities.
`country`	Yes	Two-letter country code, from /glovo/cities.
`language`	No	Optional two-letter response language; defaults to en. A city's supported languages are in /glovo/city's supported_languages.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.17.20Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden well: it discloses the full return shape (name, enabled flag, languages, currency, timezone) and the specific error contract for unknown cities. It omits auth requirements and rate limits, but for a read-style lookup the disclosed behavior is substantial.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and followed by the field enumeration and error case; nothing is buried. The second sentence repeats 'market settings' from the first, a small redundancy that keeps it just short of maximally tight.

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

Completeness4/5

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

There is no output schema or annotations, so the description must describe returns and errors itself, and it does both. The remaining gap is minor: no mention of validation order for country/city pairs or of any caching/freshness behavior, which an agent might want for an 'enabled' flag.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description adds real meaning by tying the language parameter to the city's supported_languages list, clarifying that the accepted values differ per city. It reinforces, without duplicating, the schema's note that city/country come from /glovo/cities.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource ('Get one Glovo city's market settings') and immediately enumerates the returned fields, so an agent can tell this is a single-city lookup rather than a listing. The scope word 'one' distinguishes it implicitly from a cities-list operation.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives concrete failure guidance: an unserved city or country returns a 400 pointing to /glovo/cities, which tells the agent to discover valid inputs there first. It stops short of explicitly naming a sibling tool (e.g. glovo_cities) as the prerequisite step, so the routing is implied rather than stated.

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

Deploy Server