Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official

ulta_product_questions

Fetch an Ulta Beauty product's customer questions and answers by product_id; returns one page of questions with every answer received.

Instructions

Get an Ulta Beauty product's customer questions and answers. Returns one page of an Ulta Beauty product's customer questions, each with every answer it received. product_id is taken from a search result's product_id field or a product page's URL. A product with zero questions, or a well-formed but unrecognized product_id, returns a normal, empty result rather than an error.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoResult page, 1-based, defaults to 1
product_idYesUlta product id, from a search result's product_id field

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.14.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does add real behavioral context: pagination ('one page'), answer nesting ('every answer it received'), and graceful empty-result behavior for zero-question or unrecognized product_ids. However it omits rate limits, auth needs, and how many questions per page, so the disclosure is partial.

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 tight sentences, each earning its place: the first states purpose, the second the return shape, the third the ID source and the empty-result edge case. Front-loaded with purpose and no filler.

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 or annotations exist, so the description must carry everything, and it does cover return granularity, pagination, and non-error empty results. It falls short of fully self-sufficient only by not indicating page size or the page parameter's default behavior.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% so the baseline is 3, but the description genuinely adds meaning: it tells the agent product_id can come from a search result's product_id field OR a product page URL, extending what the schema documents. It still says nothing about the page parameter's semantics.

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?

States a specific verb (Get) and resource (an Ulta Beauty product's customer questions and answers), and the Q&A framing naturally separates it from review-oriented siblings like ulta_product_reviews. An agent can identify the resource without opening the schema.

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?

It implies when the tool applies by explaining where product_id comes from (a search result field or product page URL), but never names an alternative tool or an explicit condition for choosing this over ulta_product_reviews or ulta_product. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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