etsy_listing_reviews_list
Fetch reviews for a specific Etsy listing to analyze customer feedback and improve products.
Instructions
List reviews for a specific listing
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| offset | No | ||
| listing_id | Yes |
Fetch reviews for a specific Etsy listing to analyze customer feedback and improve products.
List reviews for a specific listing
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| offset | No | ||
| listing_id | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds no behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. It does not disclose pagination, ordering, or any side effects, which is expected for a listing tool.
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?
The description is a single concise sentence, but it is overly terse and lacks necessary detail about parameters and behavior, reducing effectiveness.
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 the three parameters, no output schema, and read-only nature, the description should at least mention pagination or result ordering. It fails to provide minimal context for correct usage.
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?
Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description provides no explanation of the three parameters (listing_id, limit, offset). This forces the agent to infer usage, making it insufficient.
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 verb 'list' and resource 'reviews' for a specific listing, distinguishing it from shop-level reviews. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'etsy_shop_reviews_list'.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any conditions for usage. The description is purely declarative without context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/BusyBee3333/etsy-mcp-2026-complete'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server