mealie-agent-mcp

by loidolt

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Hybrid

Add Shopping List Items

add_shopping_list_items

Adds free-text items with optional quantities to a specified Mealie shopping list and returns the newly added entries.

Instructions

Add free-text items to a shopping list. Returns the added items.

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": {
      "list_id": "<list_id>",
      "items": "<items>"
    },
    "name": "add_shopping_list_items"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`items`	Yes
`list_id`	Yes	Shopping list id.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Nov 6, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare a non-read-only, non-destructive, closed-world mutation, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it returns the added items, but omits key behavior for a list mutation: whether items are appended or replace the list, how duplicates are handled, and the 100-item cap enforced by the 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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, with no filler. It could still spend one of those sentences on the append-vs-replace behavior instead of restating the return value.

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?

An output schema exists, so explaining return values is not required, yet the description doesn't compensate by covering mutation semantics such as append behavior or item limits. Adequate for a simple add tool but leaves real gaps for an agent deciding how to batch items.

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 coverage is 50%, and the nested item fields (text, quantity) are already well documented in the schema itself. The description only reinforces the 'free-text' nature of the items array and adds no detail on list_id or quantity semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 ('Add') and resource ('free-text items to a shopping list'), which is enough to separate it from add_recipe_to_shopping_list. It doesn't explicitly call out that distinction, but 'free-text' hints at it.

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 phrase 'free-text items' implies this is for ad-hoc entries rather than recipe-derived ones, giving implied usage guidance. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement or named alternative, so routing still requires inference from sibling names.

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