List products in this site's store (Wix Stores). Returns name, price, stock status, and product type.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| q | No | Optional search term matched against product name. | |
| limit | No | Max products to return (default 20, max 100). |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the return fields but omits behavioral traits like read-only nature, authorization needs, pagination behavior, or rate limits. Acceptable but could be more transparent.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence with clear action and return information. No wasted words; front-loaded with verb and resource.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool's simplicity (2 optional params, no output schema), the description adequately covers purpose and return values. Missing pagination detail for the limit parameter, but overall sufficient.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, and the description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. The parameters (q, limit) are well-described in the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly states the tool lists products in a site's store (Wix Stores) and specifies returned fields (name, price, stock status, product type). This distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_blog_posts or list_booking_services.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., list_offers, list_booking_services). The description merely states what it does without context for selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clear, distinct purpose. Tools like create_booking and request_reservation target different services (appointments vs. restaurant tables), and reserve_event_tickets vs. rsvp_event differentiate paid holds from free RSVPs. No overlapping functionality that would confuse an agent.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., create_booking, list_events, search_dishes) using lowercase with underscores. No mixing of conventions or irregular verbs.
28 tools cover a broad domain of neighborhood directory services (bookings, events, movies, restaurant menus, forms, etc.). While the count is slightly high, each tool serves a specific function and is justified by the domain scope.
The tool set provides comprehensive coverage for a neighborhood directory: search, booking, reservations, event management, menus, reviews, forms, loyalty, and more. No obvious gaps; all core user needs are addressed.
