Fetch a page of Costco product reviews with title, text, rating, author, and recommendation by product ID.
Get a Costco product's reviews. Returns a page of a Costco product's reviews: title, text, rating, author, and recommendation for each. Public data sourced from Costco's own review platform.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Costco product id, e.g. from a search result's id field |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It notes the tool returns 'a page' of reviews and that data is public, offering some context, but it does not explain pagination behavior, error conditions, or confirm that this is a read-only operation beyond the word 'Get'.
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 tightly written sentences front-load the purpose and enumerate the output fields without extraneous detail. Every word earns its place.
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?
For a simple one-parameter read operation, the description covers purpose, return content, and data provenance. It falls short only in not addressing pagination mechanics or next-page behavior, which would be helpful for an agent processing multiple pages.
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 schema already documents the single 'id' parameter with 100% coverage, including guidance on sourcing it from a search result. The description adds only general references to 'a Costco product', offering no additional detail about format or constraints beyond what the schema provides.
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 opens with a specific verb ('Get') and a clear resource ('a Costco product's reviews'), immediately distinguishing this tool from siblings like costco_search or costco_product. It also enumerates the returned fields, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool produces.
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?
The description implies the tool is for retrieving reviews for a specific product, but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer it over related Costco tools or how to obtain the required id beyond the schema note. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.