Submit a form on behalf of the user (Wix Forms). Call list_forms first to get the formId and field keys. Returns a submissionId on success.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| fields | Yes | Key-value pairs matching the field keys from list_forms. Example: { "field_1": "João", "field_2": "joao@email.com" } | |
| formId | Yes | Form ID from list_forms. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states it submits a form and returns a submissionId, but does not disclose if it is destructive, requires authentication, or any other behavioral traits beyond the action.
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?
Two sentences front-load purpose and prerequisite, with no wasted words. Efficient and clear.
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?
With two parameters and no output schema, the description covers prerequisites and return value. Referencing list_forms provides sufficient context for the agent to use the tool correctly.
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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds value by stating that fields must match keys from list_forms and providing an example. This goes beyond the schema's basic property descriptions.
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 states 'Submit a form on behalf of the user (Wix Forms)', providing a clear verb and resource. The Wix Forms context differentiates it from sibling tools like create_booking or create_checkout, but no explicit sibling differentiation is given.
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?
Description explicitly says 'Call list_forms first to get the formId and field keys', giving a clear prerequisite. It does not provide when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the context is sufficient.
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.
Every tool targets a distinct Wix resource or action: bookings, events, store, forms, places, menus, etc. The four booking-related tools are clearly separated by domain (appointments, restaurant tables, paid events, free events), with descriptions that eliminate ambiguity.
The set follows a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (create_, get_, list_, search_, submit_). Minor deviations exist: get_reviews and get_event_tickets return collections (could be list_), and rsvp_event uses an abbreviation, but these do not affect clarity.
At 26 tools, the set is larger than the typical 3–15 well-scoped range, but the server covers a broad umbrella of Wix integrations for a neighborhood directory. Each tool maps to a distinct function, so the count is justified by the scope, though it is on the heavier side.
The surface covers discovery and transactional workflows: searching places/dishes, viewing menus/reviews/guides/offers, booking appointments and tables, reserving event tickets, purchasing products, submitting forms, and reading site info. Minor gaps exist (no cancel/update operations), but these are handled via external checkout links and are acceptable for a directory.
