get_loyalty_info
Get the loyalty/rewards program details for this site (Wix Loyalty). Returns program name, points currency name, and tier structure with required points per tier.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Get the loyalty/rewards program details for this site (Wix Loyalty). Returns program name, points currency name, and tier structure with required points per tier.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It states the tool returns specific data, implying a read-only operation, but does not mention potential side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or failure modes. For a simple read, it is adequate but could be more explicit.
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?
The description is concise: three sentences, no wasted words. It front-loads the purpose and then provides specific return details. Every sentence earns its place, achieving efficiency.
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 no output schema or annotations, the description adequately covers the return structure (program name, points currency name, tier structure). It does not mention edge cases like missing loyalty program, but for a simple read operation on a site with known loyalty, it is largely complete.
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?
The input schema has zero parameters, so schema description coverage is 100%. Per guidelines, 0 parameters baseline is 4. The description does not add parameter semantics because there are none, so the baseline score applies.
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?
The description clearly states the tool's purpose: to get loyalty/rewards program details for the site. It specifies the verb 'Get', the resource 'loyalty/rewards program details', and lists the returned data (program name, points currency name, tier structure). This distinguishes it from sibling tools, none of which deal with loyalty.
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?
The description implies usage when loyalty information is needed, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use vs alternative tools, nor any exclusions or context. Sibling tools include many other 'get' and 'list' operations, but no comparison or selection criteria are given.
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 targets a distinct resource or action: appointments, products, events, places, menus, reviews, forms, etc. No two tools have overlapping purposes; even similar booking tools (create_booking, request_reservation, reserve_event_tickets, rsvp_event) are clearly differentiated by description and use case.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using lowercase with underscores (e.g., create_booking, list_events, search_places). Verbs are appropriate (create, get, list, search, submit, request, reserve, rsvp) and nouns clearly indicate the resource.
28 tools cover a broad domain (neighborhood directory with Wix integrations). While each tool has a clear purpose, the count exceeds the typical 3-15 range slightly, making the surface feel somewhat heavy but still manageable.
The tool surface provides comprehensive coverage for the domain: discovery (search places, list events, list guides), details (get place, get reviews), booking (appointments, restaurant, event tickets, RSVP), checkout, forms, FAQs, loyalty, pricing plans, and more. No obvious dead ends for common user journeys.