kleinanzeigen-mcp

Get listing

get_listing

Read-only

Fetch a complete classified ad by its ID from kleinanzeigen.de to view all listing details.

Instructions

One listing in full, by ad id.

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": {
      "ad_id": "<ad_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_listing"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ad_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	No
`ad_id`	No
`flags`	No
`price`	No
`stale`	Yes
`title`	No
`images`	No
`posted`	No
`seller`	No
`status`	Yes
`postcode`	No
`attributes`	No
`fetched_at`	Yes
`source_url`	Yes
`category_id`	No
`description`	No
`image_count`	No
`location_id`	No
`listing_type`	No
`stale_reason`	No
`location_name`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Sep 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a small amount of behavioral context by saying 'in full,' indicating a complete listing is returned, but it doesn't mention edge cases like missing IDs or unavailable listings.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single short phrase, front-loaded with the most important information: one listing, full detail, identified by ad id. There is no wasted text.

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?

For a simple single-parameter retrieval tool with an output schema and read-only annotation, this description is complete enough. The agent knows what resource is returned, how to identify it, and can rely on the schema for the response shape.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. 'by ad id' clearly maps the single required parameter ad_id to the identifier of the listing to fetch, which is sufficient for this one-parameter tool.

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?

The description states a specific resource ('one listing') and the lookup mode ('in full, by ad id'), making the tool's purpose clear. It distinguishes itself from search_listings by emphasizing a single full record rather than search results, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies this tool is for retrieving a single listing when you already have its ad id. It does not explicitly state when to choose it over siblings like search_listings or get_shop, leaving that inference to the agent.

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

Deploy Server