MercadoLibre MCP Server

by dedero1985

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

Get Shipment

get_shipment

Retrieve tracking status and delivery details for a MercadoLibre shipment using its shipment ID.

Instructions

Get tracking information for a shipment.

Usage examples:

"Track shipment 987654321"

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": {
      "input": "<input>"
    },
    "name": "get_shipment"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`input`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 11, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. 'Get' strongly implies a read-only operation, which is useful. However, it does not explicitly state non-mutation, authentication assumptions, or how the optional account/site_id selection behaves at runtime.

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?

The description is short, front-loaded, and free of filler. The usage example is slightly redundant with the first sentence but still compact and harmless.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple lookup tool with an output schema and documented parameters, this is close to sufficient. The main gaps are the lack of usage guidance around alternatives and the minimal behavioral detail beyond 'get', which matters because no annotations are present.

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?

The description itself adds little parameter meaning beyond the example mapping 'shipment 987654321' to shipment_id. The input schema is actually descriptive for account, site_id, and shipment_id, so the agent still has the necessary semantics even though the tool description does not enrich them.

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 clearly states a specific action and resource: 'Get tracking information for a shipment.' This is not a tautology and distinguishes the tool from obviously different siblings like get_item or get_user. However, it does not explicitly differentiate it from closely related order or shipping-method tools.

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 description includes a usage example ('Track shipment 987654321') but provides no guidance about when to prefer this tool over alternatives, when not to use it, or what context makes it appropriate. No sibling alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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