Get all FAQ questions and answers for this site (Wix FAQ). Grouped by category. Use this to answer common questions about the site — opening hours, parking, policies, etc.
| 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 carries the full burden. It states the tool returns FAQs grouped by category, but does not disclose any limitations, data freshness, or response structure. Basic transparency is present.
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-loaded with the action ('Get all FAQ questions and answers') and purpose. Every sentence is necessary and 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?
Without an output schema, the description clearly indicates the structure (questions and answers, grouped by category). For a simple read tool, it is sufficiently 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?
There are no parameters (0 params, 100% schema coverage). The description adds value by explaining the type of data returned, which compensates for the lack of parameters. Baseline for 0 params is 4.
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 it retrieves FAQ questions and answers, grouped by category, with specific use cases (opening hours, parking, etc.). It effectively distinguishes from siblings by being the only FAQ-related tool.
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 explicitly says 'Use this to answer common questions about the site', providing clear usage context. It does not specify when not to use it or alternatives, but given the distinct purpose, it is adequate.
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 (booking, store checkout, events, restaurant, etc.) with clear descriptions. No two tools have overlapping purposes; even similar actions like create_booking, create_checkout, and reserve_event_tickets are differentiated by their specific contexts.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with underscores (e.g., get_availability, list_blog_posts, reserve_event_tickets). There is no mixing of conventions like camelCase, and verbs are predictable (get, list, create, search, submit, etc.).
With 28 tools, the count is slightly on the high side but justified by the broad scope covering a neighborhood directory with multiple features (places, events, movies, menus, bookings, forms, etc.). Each tool serves a clear purpose, though a few could be consolidated.
The tool surface is comprehensive for the server's purpose, covering search, details, bookings, events, movies, menus, blogs, FAQs, forms, and more. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no tool to cancel bookings or update reviews), but core workflows are well-covered.