Skip to main content
Glama
enesjakozh
lumile

MercadoLibre MCP Server

by lumile
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Remote

MercadoLibre MCP Server

An MCP server that provides access to MercadoLibre API.

IMPORTANT: due to changes in MercadoLibre's API policies, it is no longer possible to access their search API. As a result, we have had to deprecate the search_products tool. This change is in compliance with MercadoLibre's new restrictions on API usage. Other tools remain functional and will continue to be supported.

Features

Tools

  • search_products - DEPRECATED: Search products in MercadoLibre, and return a list of products. (No longer available due to API policy changes)

    • query - The search query

    • category - The category to search in

    • filters - The filters to apply

  • product_reviews - Get product reviews

  • product_description - Get product description

  • seller_reputation - Get seller reputation

Related MCP server: mercadolibre-mcp

Setup

Prerequisites

You'll need a MercadoLibre Client ID and Client Secret to use this server. You can get one for free at https://developers.mercadolibre.com/, create an application and get the credentials.

Once you have the credentials, you can set the CLIENT_ID and CLIENT_SECRET environment variables. And theres also the need to set the SITE_ID environment variable to the site you want to use.

Mercado Libre Site ID

  • MLA: Argentina (default)

  • MLB: Brasil

  • MCO: Colombia

  • MEX: México

  • MLU: Uruguay

  • MLC: Chile

Installation

There are two ways to use this server:

Installing via Smithery

To install MercadoLibre MCP Server for Claude Desktop automatically via Smithery:

npx -y @smithery/cli install @lumile/mercadolibre-mcp --client claude

Option 1: NPX (Recommended)

Add this configuration to your Claude Desktop config file:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "mercadolibre-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "mercadolibre-mcp"
      ],
      "env": {
        "CLIENT_ID": "<YOUR_CLIENT_ID>",
        "CLIENT_SECRET": "<YOUR_CLIENT_SECRET>",
        "SITE_ID": "<YOUR_SITE_ID>"
      }
    }
  }
}

Option 2: Local Installation

  1. Clone the repository

  2. Install dependencies:

npm install

  1. Build the server:

npm run build

  1. Add this configuration to your Claude Desktop config:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "mercadolibre-mcp": {
      "command": "node",
      "args": [
        "/path/to/mercadolibre-mcp/dist/index.js"
      ],
      "env": {
        "CLIENT_ID": "<YOUR_CLIENT_ID>",
        "CLIENT_SECRET": "<YOUR_CLIENT_SECRET>",
        "SITE_ID": "<YOUR_SITE_ID>"
      }
    }
  }
}

Debugging

Since MCP servers communicate over stdio, debugging can be challenging. We recommend using the MCP Inspector, which is available as a package script:

npm run inspector

The Inspector will provide a URL to access debugging tools in your browser.

Contributing

Contributions are extremely welcome! Please open a PR with new MCP servers or any other improvements to the codebase.

Disclaimer

This project is not affiliated with MercadoLibre. All logos are trademarks of their respective owners.

License

This project is licensed under the MIT License - see the LICENSE.md file for details.

Available Tools

3 tools
product_descriptionB

Obtiene la descripción de un producto

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
productIdNoID del producto

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('obtiene') but doesn't describe whether this is a read-only operation, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what the return format looks like. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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, efficient sentence in Spanish that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, with zero wasted text, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate but has clear gaps. It states what the tool does but lacks behavioral details, usage context, and output information. Without annotations or output schema, the description should provide more complete guidance for effective use.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'productId' documented in the schema as 'ID del producto'. The description doesn't add any additional meaning about parameters beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or constraints. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Obtiene la descripción de un producto' clearly states the verb ('obtiene' - gets) and resource ('descripción de un producto' - product description), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'product_reviews' or 'seller_reputation', which would require mentioning it's specifically for retrieving descriptive information rather than reviews or seller data.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'product_reviews' or 'seller_reputation'. It doesn't specify use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage based on tool names alone without explicit direction.

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

product_reviewsC

Obtiene las reseñas de un producto

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
productIdNoID del producto

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool obtains reviews but doesn't mention whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires authentication, rate limits, error handling, or what the return format looks like (e.g., list, summary, ratings). This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves beyond its basic purpose.

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, clear sentence in Spanish ('Obtiene las reseñas de un producto') that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and efficient, making it easy to parse quickly, which is ideal for conciseness in tool descriptions.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (simple read operation with one parameter) but lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the reviews include (e.g., text, ratings, dates), how they're returned, or any behavioral aspects like pagination or errors. For a tool that likely returns data, more context is needed to use it effectively.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with 'productId' documented as 'ID del producto'. The description doesn't add any parameter semantics beyond this, such as format examples or constraints. Since the schema does the heavy lifting, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the description doesn't compensate but also doesn't detract.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description 'Obtiene las reseñas de un producto' clearly states the action (obtains) and resource (product reviews), providing a basic understanding of the tool's function. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'product_description' or 'seller_reputation' beyond the obvious resource difference, lacking specificity about scope or format of the reviews obtained.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'product_description' or 'seller_reputation'. It doesn't specify prerequisites, context for usage, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage based solely on the tool name and description without explicit direction.

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

seller_reputationC

Obtiene la reputación de un vendedor

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sellerIdNoID del vendedor

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool 'obtains' reputation, implying a read operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it requires authentication, rate limits, error handling, or what the output format might be. For a tool with no annotations, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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, efficient sentence in Spanish that directly states the tool's purpose. It's front-loaded with no wasted words, making it highly concise and well-structured for quick understanding.

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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'reputación' entails (e.g., numerical score, textual feedback), how results are returned, or any dependencies. For a tool with minimal structured data, the description should provide more context to be fully helpful.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with the parameter 'sellerId' documented as 'ID del vendedor'. The description doesn't add any meaning beyond this, such as format examples or constraints. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Obtiene la reputación de un vendedor' clearly states the action (obtains) and resource (seller reputation) in Spanish. It's specific about what the tool does, though it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like product_description or product_reviews, which focus on different resources. No tautology with the name 'seller_reputation'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention sibling tools or any context for usage, such as prerequisites or scenarios where this tool is appropriate. This leaves the agent with minimal direction.

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

Install Server
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

B3/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose targeting different aspects of products and sellers: product_description retrieves product details, product_reviews gets customer feedback, and seller_reputation assesses seller credibility. There is no overlap or ambiguity between these functions.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent snake_case pattern with a clear 'noun_noun' structure (product_description, product_reviews, seller_reputation). This predictable naming makes it easy for agents to understand and select the appropriate tool.

Tool Count2/5

With only 3 tools, the server feels under-scoped for a marketplace domain like MercadoLibre. While the tools cover basic product and seller information, there are likely many other operations (e.g., search, purchase, listing management) that are missing, making the set feel incomplete for comprehensive marketplace interactions.

Completeness2/5

The tool surface is severely incomplete for a marketplace server. It only provides read-only access to product descriptions, reviews, and seller reputation, with no ability to search for products, create listings, manage orders, or perform other essential marketplace operations. This creates significant gaps that will limit agent functionality.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.

Looking for Admin?

If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

Appeared in Searches

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/lumile/mercadolibre-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server