Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

OurFamilyWizard MCP

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Get AllTrails trail reviews

alltrails_get_trail_reviews
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch user reviews for an AllTrails trail using its numeric ID; get compact user/rating/comment data by default or full records for detailed analysis.

Instructions

Get user reviews for an AllTrails trail by its numeric trail id. Returns just { user, rating, comment } per review by default; pass view:"full" for the whole records.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
viewNoResponse shape: "compact" (default) drops fields the response already carries elsewhere; "full" returns every field this server understands. compact returns { count, reviews: [{ user, rating, comment }] }; "full" returns AllTrails' whole review records. (No route geometry either way — that is alltrails_get_trail.)
limitNoMax reviews to return (default 20)
trailIdYesNumeric AllTrails trail id

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv3.1.9
    • addedInput schema / properties / trailId / pattern
      Added value: +"^\\d+$"
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv3.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  3. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.3.1
    • removedInput schema / properties / compact
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Return a slim { user, rating, comment } per review (default false)",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / view
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Response shape: \"compact\" (default) drops fields the response already carries elsewhere; \"full\" returns every field this server understands. compact returns { count, reviews: [{ user, rating, comment }] }; \"full\" returns AllTrails' whole review records. (No route geometry either way — that is alltrails_get_trail.)",
+  "enum": [
+    "compact",
+    "full"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  4. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds default-vs-full response behavior, but no auth requirements, rate limits, pagination behavior, or failure modes beyond that, and the response detail it gives is already present in the schema's view 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?

Two sentences, zero filler, and the core action plus return format are front-loaded. Nothing in the description is padding, even if the second clause partly mirrors the schema.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description does useful work by naming the default per-review fields and the view:'full' alternative. It omits the wrapping 'count' field and any note on default limit/pagination, which a caller iterating over results would want.

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 description coverage is 100% and the view enum is fully documented in the schema, including the compact field list and the note that no route geometry is returned. The description's restatement of the compact shape adds little beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Get user reviews for an AllTrails trail') and keys it to a numeric trail id. The resource ('reviews') is clearly distinct from siblings like alltrails_get_trail_photos or alltrails_get_trail_weather, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: it says to supply a numeric trail id. There is no statement of when to prefer this over alltrails_get_trail or how it relates to other trail-fetching siblings, so the agent must infer the selection context.

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