Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

rottentomatoes_movie_reviews

Retrieve normalized Rotten Tomatoes critic or audience reviews for any movie using its URL or path, with optional pagination and review-type filters.

Instructions

Rotten Tomatoes movie reviews. Returns normalized critic or audience reviews from Rotten Tomatoes public review JSON hydrated by the movie review page, including pagination metadata. Pass exactly one of path or url. Supported type values are critics, top-critics, audience, and verified-audience.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNoAbsolute https://www.rottentomatoes.com movie URL
pathNoRotten Tomatoes movie path
typeNoReview type: critics, top-critics, audience, verified-audience
afterNoPagination cursor from data.page_info.end_cursor
limitNoReviews to return, default 10, max 20

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.17.5
    • addedInput schema / properties / type / enum
      Added value: +[
+  "critics",
+  "top-critics",
+  "audience",
+  "verified-audience"
+]
  2. Addedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It states that reviews are 'normalized' and includes pagination metadata, which gives insight into output formatting. It doesn't mention side effects, but as a read-only review fetcher, this is sufficient and adds value beyond a bare description.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: purpose, output details, and parameter constraints. Front-loaded with the main purpose, no fluff or unnecessary detail.

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?

Without an output schema, the description provides some output context (normalized reviews, pagination metadata) and covers the key parameter constraint. It doesn't elaborate on error handling or return structure, but for a simple fetch tool with well-documented parameters, this is adequate.

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?

The schema already describes all parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a crucial constraint not in the schema: 'Pass exactly one of path or url', which clarifies mutual exclusivity. It also repeats the enum values, which is redundant but confirms the allowed types. This extra constraint justifies a score above baseline.

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?

The description clearly states it returns Rotten Tomatoes movie reviews, specifying the resource (Rotten Tomatoes), the action (returns), and the output (normalized critic or audience reviews). It distinguishes from siblings like metacritic movie review tools by naming the source and movie scope.

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?

The description provides parameter-level guidance (exactly one of path or url) but does not explicitly address when to use this tool vs alternatives like metacritic_movie_critic_reviews or other review tools. The purpose is implied by the name and content, but no explicit when/when-not guidance is given.

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