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 are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes the tool's behavior (listing forms, returning fields) and implies a read-only operation. No side effects mentioned, but none expected.
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, front-loaded with purpose, no extraneous text.
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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does and when to use it. No gaps identified.
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 no parameters (100% coverage), so baseline is 4. Description adds no parameter info, but none is needed.
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 lists available contact/signup forms (specific resource) and specifies return fields (name, ID, field definitions). It distinguishes itself from sibling tool 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?
Explicitly says 'Use before submit_form to discover which fields to fill,' providing clear context and naming an alternative.
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.