Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

OurFamilyWizard MCP

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

alltrails_get_trail_reviews

Read-only

Retrieve user reviews for an AllTrails trail by its numeric trail ID. Returns user, rating, and comment summaries; use the full view for complete review records.

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 changedv3.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. 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"
+}
  3. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers safety, and the description adds valuable behavioral scope: returns compact { user, rating, comment } by default, view:"full" for whole records. It also clarifies what is NOT returned in the schema note. This goes beyond the annotation without contradicting it.

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 tightly written sentences, front-loaded with the tool's purpose and followed by the essential response-shape distinction. No filler or repetition of schema content.

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 read-only tool with no output schema, the description supplies the default response shape, the full variant, and a sibling exclusion. The schema documents all parameters. Minor missing details like rating representation or empty-result behavior are not material for a simple review-list tool.

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%, so the schema already documents all three parameters. The description's mention of 'view:"full"' adds no meaning beyond the enum description. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 and resource: 'Get user reviews for an AllTrails trail by its numeric trail id.' It is clearly distinct from siblings like alltrails_get_trail_photos, alltrails_get_trail_weather, and alltrails_get_trail.

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?

The main description doesn't give broad when-to-use guidance, but the view parameter explicitly excludes route geometry: 'No route geometry either way — that is alltrails_get_trail.' This redirects agents to the correct sibling for geometry. Combined with the focused tool name, selection is clear enough.

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