chrono24-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Get dealer ratings

get_dealer_ratings

Read-only

Fetch a dealer's Chrono24 customer reviews by dealer ID from watch listings. Filter by star rating, page through results, and see ratings, review text, and dealer replies.

Instructions

Fetch a dealer's customer reviews by their dealerId (from get_watch's sellerIds - NOT the customerId). Includes per-review rating, text, dealer reply and paging totals; filter with stars (1-5).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`size`	No	Ratings per page (max 50)
`stars`	No	Only reviews with this star rating (1-5); omit for all
`offset`	No	Offset for paging through ratings
`dealerId`	Yes	Dealer id from get_watch's sellerIds (NOT the customerId) - powers reviews

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	Yes
`total`	Yes
`offset`	Yes
`ratings`	Yes
`dealerId`	Yes
`filteredTotal`	Yes
`availableStarFilters`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedv0.6.0Sep 4, 2026

removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
addedInput schema / properties / offset / maximum
```
Added value: +9007199254740991
```

addedInput schema / properties / stars

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Only reviews with this star rating (1-5); omit for all",
+  "maximum": 5,
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "availableStarFilters": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "count": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "dealerId": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "filteredTotal": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "offset": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "ratings": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "author": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "country": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "date": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "dealerComment": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "rating": {
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "recommendsSeller": {
+            "type": "boolean"
+          },
+          "review": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "watchTitle": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "author",
+          "country",
+          "date",
+          "watchTitle",
+          "rating",
+          "recommendsSeller",
+          "review"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "total": {
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "dealerId",
+    "total",
+    "filteredTotal",
+    "offset",
+    "count",
+    "availableStarFilters",
+    "ratings"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv0.4.0Aug 26, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail: returned reviews include text, dealer replies and paging totals, and results can be filtered by star rating. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 dense sentences with no filler. The key action, the critical identifier caveat, the response contents, and the filtering option are all front-loaded and each clause earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only paginated review tool, the description is complete: it states the identifier source, the contents of the response, the filtering option, and paging totals. An output schema exists, so return structure does not need to be explained further.

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. The description adds extra meaning for dealerId by specifying the exact source (get_watch's sellerIds) and warning against using the customerId. It also clarifies the stars filter, while size and offset remain well-documented in the schema.

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?

The description starts with a specific action and resource: 'Fetch a dealer's customer reviews by their dealerId'. It also distinguishes the needed identifier from a common confusable ('NOT the customerId') and states the content (per-review rating, text, dealer reply, paging totals), which separates it from aggregate sibling tools like get_dealer_rating_summary.

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 description gives clear usage context: use a dealerId coming from get_watch's sellerIds, not the customerId. It does not explicitly name alternatives like get_dealer_rating_summary for aggregate ratings, but the mention of per-review data and paging makes the intended use case reasonably clear.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.