domustudio-mcp-server

Leggi un condominio per id

domustudio_get_condominio

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetches a single condominio from a Domustudio archive by ID, scanning the full list when direct lookup is unavailable.

Instructions

Restituisce il singolo condominio con l'id indicato.

L'API non espone una lettura per id: lo strumento scarica la lista completa dei condomini e seleziona la voce corrispondente.

Args:

condominio_id (number): id Domustudio del condominio
archivio (string, opzionale): archivio da interrogare
response_format ('markdown' | 'json'): default 'markdown'

Restituisce (json): { "archivio": string, "trovato": boolean, "condominio": object | null }

Errori:

"trovato": false se nessun condominio ha quell'id nell'archivio indicato.

L'API Domustudio è di sola lettura: espone solo tre endpoint GET. Domustudio resta il sistema di registrazione — ogni correzione va fatta da un operatore dentro il gestionale.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`archivio`	No	Nome dell'archivio Domustudio da interrogare. Opzionale se ne è configurato uno solo; usare domustudio_list_archivi per l'elenco.
`condominio_id`	Yes	Id Domustudio del condominio (campo 'id').
`response_format`	No	'markdown' per una sintesi leggibile dei campi principali, 'json' per il record completo.	markdown

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`trovato`	Yes
`archivio`	Yes
`condominio`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.4.0Sep 12, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds genuinely new behavioral facts: the API exposes no per-id read so the tool downloads the full list, the exact return shape ({archivio, trovato, condominio}), the not-found failure mode, and that Domustudio remains the system of record so corrections must be made by an operator. This is material context an agent cannot get from annotations or schema.

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 core purpose and the full-list workaround are front-loaded and earn their place. The trailing paragraph about the Domustudio API being read-only and the system of record is somewhat tangential to this specific tool, and the Args block duplicates the schema, but nothing is egregiously verbose.

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 read tool with annotations, a full output schema, and 100% parameter coverage, the description supplies the remaining unknowns: the hidden full-list fetch, the trovato:false error case, and the concrete return object. An agent has everything needed to call and interpret it correctly.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and all three parameters are documented there (including the archivio cross-reference to domustudio_list_archivi and the response_format enum semantics). The description's Args block restates the same fields with no added syntax, defaults, or edge-case guidance, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Restituisce il singolo condominio con l'id indicato"), which is clearly distinct from the list-style sibling domustudio_list_condomini via the word "singolo". It does not name that sibling explicitly, so an agent must infer the single-vs-list split rather than being told.

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 explains an implementation workaround (no per-id endpoint, so it fetches the whole list and filters) and the single-archivio optionality, which implies usage context. However, it never states when to prefer this over domustudio_list_condomini, nor any exclusion or prerequisite for calling it.

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

Deploy Server