Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Avito MCP

Avito MCP

by elchin92
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Delivery: task status [sandbox]

delivery_get_task
Read-onlyIdempotent

Check the status of an asynchronous delivery upload task using its task ID. See if it's processing, succeeded, or failed.

Instructions

[SANDBOX] Returns the status of an asynchronous task by the taskID obtained from upload operations (sorting centers, tags, areas, terms, tariff). Statuses: processing | success | . Processing usually takes 5–20 minutes. For delivery-service partners only.

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": {
      "task_id": "<task_id>"
    },
    "name": "delivery_get_task"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
task_idYesTask identifier (int32, in path); legacy decimal strings remain accepted.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.3.3
  2. Removedv1.3.2
  3. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.2.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / task_id / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+    "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+    "type": "integer"
+  },
+  {
+    "pattern": "^-?\\d+$",
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / task_id / description
      Previous value: -"Task identifier (the taskID from an async operation response, in path)."New value: +"Task identifier (int32, in path); legacy decimal strings remain accepted."
    • removedInput schema / properties / task_id / type
      Removed value: -"string"
  4. Changed1 schema field changedv0.8.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / task_id / description
      Previous value: -"ID задачи."New value: +"Task identifier (the taskID from an async operation response, in path)."
  5. First observedv0.7.4

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds valuable behavioral context: asynchronous nature, processing time (5-20 minutes), and possible statuses (processing, success, error). No contradictions.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with [SANDBOX] indicator. No unnecessary words; every sentence adds value.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is complete: it explains when to use, what to expect (statuses, timing), and target audience. Sufficient for correct agent invocation.

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 covers task_id syntax well (100% coverage). Description supplements by explaining the source of taskID (from upload operations), adding meaningful context beyond schema.

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 it returns the status of an asynchronous task by taskID from upload operations, listing statuses. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like delivery_tracking or delivery_get_sorting_center.

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?

It states it is for delivery-service partners and implies use after upload operations. But no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor alternatives.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools