Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

wish_product_reviews

Fetch customer reviews for a Wish product by its 24-character product id, and set count (1-200) to choose how many reviews return.

Instructions

Get a Wish product's customer reviews. Returns a Wish product's customer reviews. id is taken from a search result's product_id field or a product page's URL. A product with zero reviews returns a normal, empty result rather than an error. A caller wanting more reviews should re-request with a larger count -- this endpoint does not support an offset/cursor parameter.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesWish product id, a 24-character hex id from a search result's product_id field
countNoNumber of reviews to return, 1 to 200, defaults to 10

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.14.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose two valuable quirks: a zero-review product returns an empty result rather than an error, and the endpoint has no offset/cursor support so callers must raise count instead. It omits auth/permission needs and the shape of returned reviews, which keeps it short of a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

"Get a Wish product's customer reviews. Returns a Wish product's customer reviews." is a pure restatement that wastes the front-loaded slot. The remaining sentences are efficient and each earns its place, but the opening redundancy costs it.

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?

For a 2-parameter review endpoint with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the critical edge cases (empty results, no cursor, larger-count pagination) and id sourcing. It could describe the review contents/return shape since no output schema exists, but nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 adds meaning: it notes id may also come from a product page URL (beyond the schema's product_id-field wording) and clarifies that count is the only lever for more results because no offset/cursor exists. That is genuine added value over the schema.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource ("Get a Wish product's customer reviews"), which is clearly distinct from siblings like wish_product, wish_search, and wish_product_related. It never explicitly names an alternative, but the resource is unambiguous enough to select on. The opening two sentences are redundant but do not harm clarity.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It tells the caller where the id comes from (a search result's product_id field or a product page URL), which effectively routes from wish_search, and it explains how to get more results (re-request with a larger count). There is no explicit when-not or named sibling comparison, but the chaining and pagination context is solid.

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