mercadolivre-mcp

Navegar categorias

browse_category

Retrieves a Mercado Livre category tree from a given category ID, including root path, ad totals, and subcategories for product classification and listing analysis.

Instructions

Árvore de categorias: caminho até a raiz, total de anúncios e subcategorias. Ponto de partida: category_id de um anúncio.

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": {
      "category_id": "<category_id>"
    },
    "name": "browse_category"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`category_id`	Yes	id da categoria (ex. MLB1051)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose the payload shape (ancestor path, ad count, child categories), which is genuinely useful, but says nothing about read-only/side effects, rate limits, or whether the tree is full-depth or one level at a time.

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 clauses, front-loaded with the returned content and followed by the input source; nothing is redundant. The telegraphic fragment style is efficient, though slightly clipped compared with fully formed sentences.

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?

For a one-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers both what goes in and roughly what comes back (path, counts, subcategories). Missing depth/traversal semantics and any output format detail keep it short of a 5.

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?

The single parameter is fully documented in the schema with an example (MLB1051), so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by stating that the id originates from an ad/listing, which guides the agent on how to obtain a valid value.

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 names a concrete resource (category tree) and enumerates exactly what it yields: root path, ad totals, and subcategories, plus the anchor input. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings, but none of the listed siblings (search_products, get_item, etc.) are category-tree tools, so confusion risk is low.

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?

'Ponto de partida: category_id de um anúncio' tells the agent where to source the identifier (from a listing), which is real usage context. However, there is no explicit when-to-use versus when-not, no note on whether it is meant for category discovery before search_products, and no stated limitations.

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

Deploy Server