Skip to main content
Glama
mealie-agent-mcp

mealie-agent-mcp

by loidolt

Get Shopping List

get_shopping_list
Read-only

Retrieve items from a Mealie shopping list by list ID, returning unchecked items by default; set include_checked to also show checked-off items.

Instructions

Get a shopping list's items (id, text, checked, label). Unchecked only by default.

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>"
    },
    "name": "get_shopping_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
list_idYesShopping list id from list_shopping_lists.
include_checkedNoAlso return items already checked off.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a meaningful behavioral trait—unchecked items are returned by default—and lists the returned fields, though it omits ordering or pagination details.

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 two short sentences with zero waste. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the default behavior is stated immediately after, making it easy to scan.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the simple two-parameter tool, existing output schema, and safety annotations, the description covers purpose, default filtering, and returned fields. Minor gaps like item ordering or behavior when a list is empty are not covered, but these are low-risk omissions for a read-only list retrieval tool.

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%, so both parameters (list_id and include_checked) are fully documented in the schema. The description's default note aligns with the schema but does not add syntax or format details 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Get a shopping list's items', and names the fields returned. It is clearly distinct from siblings like list_shopping_lists (which lists lists, not items), though it does not explicitly call out that distinction.

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?

Usage is implied by the default behavior ('Unchecked only by default'), which tells the agent that include_checked is opt-in. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus list_shopping_lists or other siblings, and no exclusions or alternatives are named.

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