Skip to main content
Glama

list_forms

List available contact/signup forms on this site (Wix Forms). Returns form name, ID, and field definitions (label, type, required). Use before submit_form to discover which fields to fill.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations, so description carries full burden. It discloses that it returns form name, ID, and field definitions, implying a safe read operation. Could mention limits or auth, but for a simple list tool it's sufficient.

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?

Two efficient sentences with no filler. First sentence states purpose and output, second gives usage guidance. Ideal conciseness.

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?

Low complexity with 0 params. Description fully covers what the tool does and returns, and provides actionable usage hint. No gaps given the context.

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?

No parameters, schema coverage is 100%. Baseline 4, and description adds no param info as none needed. It focuses on output instead.

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

Purpose5/5

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

Description clearly states 'List available contact/signup forms' with verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like submit_form by specifying it provides field definitions for use before submitting.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly advises 'Use before submit_form to discover which fields to fill,' providing clear context. No exclusions mentioned, but the guidance is strong.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct domain (e.g., booking, restaurant reservation, event RSVP, movie showtimes) with clear descriptions that prevent confusion. Overlapping verbs like 'create' are used for different resource types, and the descriptions explicitly distinguish their contexts.

Naming Consistency5/5

All 28 tools follow a strict verb_noun pattern with underscores, e.g., create_booking, get_availability, list_events. No mixing of conventions or inconsistent verb styles.

Tool Count4/5

28 tools is at the upper end of reasonable for a broad neighborhood directory server covering places, bookings, events, movies, store, forms, and more. While each tool serves a distinct purpose, the count feels slightly high for a single server.

Completeness3/5

The tool surface covers core discovery and booking initiation (search, detail, book, reserve), but lacks lifecycle operations like cancel, update, or list user's existing bookings. Several operations require external checkout or confirmation links, creating workflow gaps.

Resources