get_reviews
Get published reviews for this site (Wix Reviews). Returns reviewer name, rating, title, and content.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max reviews to return (default 10, max 50). |
Get published reviews for this site (Wix Reviews). Returns reviewer name, rating, title, and content.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max reviews to return (default 10, max 50). |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, description carries full burden. It discloses that reviews are published and returns specific fields, but does not mention read-only nature, rate limits, pagination, or authentication requirements.
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 concise sentences with no fluff. Purpose and return value are front-loaded.
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?
For a simple read-only tool with one parameter, description covers purpose and return fields. Missing mention of default limit and sorting, but overall adequate.
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% and the only parameter 'limit' is described in schema. Description adds no new insight beyond what schema provides.
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?
Clearly states verb ('Get') and resource ('published reviews'), and explicitly lists returned fields (reviewer name, rating, title, content). No sibling tools for reviews, so no confusion.
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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. While it's obvious from context that this is for retrieving reviews, there is no mention of alternatives or constraints like default limit or ordering.
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.