Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

capterra_reviews

Fetch paginated Capterra product reviews with author, headline, and rating, plus aggregate rating for a given product ID. Use it to compare software feedback and assess customer sentiment.

Instructions

Get Capterra product reviews. Returns a page of Capterra reviews (author, headline, rating) plus the product's aggregate rating.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoPage number (default 1)
product_idYesCapterra product id (the numeric id in a /p/{id}/{slug}/ URL)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.6.0
  2. Removedv1.6.0
  3. Addedv1.5.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it does disclose the return payload (author, headline, rating) and that results are paged. It omits any permission/auth needs, rate limits, or how the aggregate rating is derived, so it is only partially transparent for a read tool.

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 the purpose and followed by the return shape. No filler, every clause carries information.

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 exists, so the description usefully names the returned fields and the aggregate rating. Missing only edge behavior such as paging limits or empty-result handling, which is minor for a simple two-parameter read tool.

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%, so both parameters are already documented, including the page default and the exact format of product_id. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond the schema, making baseline 3 appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: getting Capterra product reviews, with the scope (paged reviews plus aggregate rating) made explicit. It is distinguishable from sibling capterra_product and capterra_search by the review-focused framing, though it does not name them directly.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives. An agent cannot tell from the description whether reviews live under capterra_product instead, or when this tool is preferred over capterra_search.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools