Fetch customer reviews for any Wildberries product by providing its nmId. Access official Feedbacks API data to evaluate product satisfaction and buyer feedback.
Возвращает отзывы покупателей на товар по его nmId из Wildberries Feedbacks API.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| nmId | Yes | Идентификатор товара (nmId) в Wildberries. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior. It only says reviews are returned, without disclosing pagination, response format, authentication needs, rate limits, or error behavior.
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?
The description is a single concise sentence with no filler. It front-loads the primary action and identifies the key identifying parameter and API source.
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?
For a simple single-parameter read tool, the description is adequate to understand what the tool does. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it would be more complete if it indicated what a returned review contains or whether results are paginated.
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 input schema already fully documents nmId, including its type and meaning, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter details beyond confirming that reviews are fetched by nmId.
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 clearly states a specific action: returns customer reviews for a product using its nmId from the Wildberries Feedbacks API. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling get_products by focusing on reviews rather than product data.
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?
The description implies the tool should be used when reviews for a specific nmId are needed, and it names the source API. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this over get_products, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.