get_reviews
Get published reviews for this site (Wix Reviews). Returns reviewer name, rating, title, and content.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max reviews to return (default 10, max 50). |
Pinheiros
TDQS
A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It discloses the returned fields adequately but does not mention default behavior (e.g., ordering), pagination, or authentication requirements. For a simple read tool, this is acceptable but could be improved.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, no filler. First sentence clearly states purpose, second adds return details. Efficient and front-loaded.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness4/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given low complexity (1 optional param, no output schema), description covers essential return fields and purpose. Minor gap: no mention of empty results behavior, but overall complete enough.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters3/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% via the 'limit' parameter description. The tool description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose5/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly states the tool gets published reviews and lists specific return fields (reviewer name, rating, title, content). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_site_info or list_products by focusing on reviews for 'this site' with explicit mention of Wix Reviews.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Description implies reading reviews but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_products or list_blog_posts. No when-not-to or alternative suggestions are given, leaving usage inference to the agent.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool targets a distinct operation: bookings, restaurants, events, forms, etc. Even similar actions like create_booking and request_reservation are clearly differentiated by domain and description.
Naming Consistency5/5
Tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., create_booking, get_availability, list_blog_posts). Collection retrieval uses list_ while single item uses get_, which is a standard and clear convention.
Tool Count4/5
28 tools is on the upper end, but each serves a distinct function for a comprehensive neighborhood directory (places, events, booking, forms, etc.). No obvious bloat given the scope.
Completeness5/5
The tool surface covers all major user intents for a local directory: searching places, getting menus, booking services, viewing events, submitting forms, etc. No critical gaps are apparent.