wb_seller_questionsRetrieve buyer questions about your products, focusing on unanswered ones by default. Filter by answered status to address customer concerns directly.
Вопросы покупателей о товарах продавца (по умолчанию — без ответа). Нужен WB_API_TOKEN («Отзывы и вопросы»).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| skip | No | ||
| take | No | ||
| answered | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds the default unanswered filter and the token requirement, going beyond the readOnly and openWorld annotations. It does not describe pagination behavior or response structure, but for a read-only listing tool the added context is acceptable.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two short sentences with no filler: the first states the resource, the second gives the authentication requirement and default behavior. The description is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The description is too sparse for confident invocation: it omits pagination semantics, return format (with no output schema), and differentiation from feedback/review siblings. The token hint and default state are helpful but not enough.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The phrase about default unanswered provides slight semantic value for the 'answered' parameter beyond the schema default, but skip and take are completely unexplained. With 0% schema description coverage, this is insufficient compensation.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description identifies the resource (buyer questions about a seller's products) and the default state (unanswered), which helps distinguish it from siblings like wb_reviews and wb_seller_feedbacks. It lacks an explicit verb such as list or get, so the action is implied rather than stated.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as wb_seller_feedbacks or wb_reviews. The only additional context is the required WB_API_TOKEN scope, which is a prerequisite rather than a usage condition.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.