Skip to main content
Glama

list_forms

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.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided. Description discloses return values (form name, ID, field definitions). Does not mention safety/destructive nature, but as a list tool, behavioral expectations are clear.

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, front-loaded with purpose and returns, then usage guidance. No extraneous text.

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?

No output schema, but description enumerates returned fields (name, ID, field definitions with label, type, required). Adequate for an agent to understand what to expect.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Input schema has no parameters (0 required, empty properties). Schema coverage is 100%. Baseline 4 for 0 params; description adds no further param info but none needed.

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 'List available contact/signup forms' with verb 'list' and resource 'forms'. Distinguishes from sibling tools like submit_form.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

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.' Provides clear context for when to use this tool versus submit_form.

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 action and resource: booking appointments, restaurant reservations, event tickets, searches, etc. No two tools have overlapping purposes; even similar actions like create_booking and request_reservation are for different domains (appointments vs. restaurant tables).

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using lowercase and underscores (e.g., get_availability, list_events, create_booking). There is no mixing of styles like camelCase or inconsistent verbs.

Tool Count4/5

28 tools is above the typical well-scoped range but each tool serves a clear purpose within the comprehensive neighborhood directory domain. The count feels justified, though slightly heavy.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers most major features of a neighborhood directory: places, events, booking, restaurant menus, reviews, forms, etc. Minor gaps exist, such as no create_review or update operations, but core workflows are complete.

Resources