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.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, but the description discloses what the tool returns (form metadata) and implies read-only behavior via 'list'. It could be improved by mentioning if any authentication is required or if results are paginated.
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 clear front-loading: first sentence states purpose and return, second sentence provides usage guidance. No wasted words.
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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, usage, and return structure. Could mention if the list is exhaustive or if there is any limit.
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?
No parameters exist, so baseline is 4. The description adds value by explaining the output, which helps agents understand what to expect from the call.
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 lists available contact/signup forms, specifies the return values (form name, ID, field definitions), and distinguishes itself from siblings by mentioning its use before submit_form.
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?
Provides explicit usage context: 'Use before submit_form to discover which fields to fill.' While it doesn't list alternatives explicitly, the context implies when to use it and when not to (other list tools for different resources).
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 domain action, with clear boundaries between similar operations (e.g., create_booking vs request_reservation vs reserve_event_tickets). Descriptions provide enough context to avoid confusion.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case, e.g., create_booking, get_availability, list_events. No mixing of styles or ambiguous verbs.
28 tools is slightly above average but appropriate for a multi-feature neighborhood directory covering bookings, events, movies, menus, forms, etc. Each tool serves a distinct purpose, justifying the count.
The tool set covers most expected operations for a directory site: search, details, reviews, booking, events, menus, blog, FAQ, forms, etc. Minor gaps like cancellation or user booking history are acceptable given the domain scope.