SecureLend Market

display_prequalification_form

Read-only

Displays a form to collect application prefill data required to continue an enquiry. This tool only renders the form. When the user submits, the form calls submit_prequalification_details, which stores the data and may forward it to lender/partner APIs.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`prefillData`	No	Pre-fill values to populate in the form from already-known data. Keys should match field names in the prequalification details schema. Sensitive data is prohibited.
`productTypes`	No	Product types to show relevant form sections for. If not provided, the form will show all applicable sections based on the application.
`applicationId`	Yes	The SecureLend application ID for which to display the additional information form. This is used to pre-fill known values and determine which sections to show.
`requiredSections`	No	Specific sections to require the user to complete. If not provided, the form will apply default required fields for the product type.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`rendered`	Yes	Whether the form widget was successfully rendered
`prefillData`	No	Data to pre-fill in the form fields. Sensitive data is prohibited.
`applicationId`	No

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the behavioral nuance that the tool 'only renders the form' and delegates data storage/forwarding to submit_prequalification_details. This goes beyond the annotations by explaining the tool's side-effect-free nature and its role in a larger workflow. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

The description is two sentences long, front-loads the purpose, and then clarifies behavior and the relationship to a sibling tool. There is no redundant information or fluff. Every sentence contributes value.

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?

Given that an output schema exists and the parameter schema already documents all parameters, the description adequately covers the tool's role, side-effect profile (with annotations), and the submit workflow. It is complete for an agent to understand when and how to invoke this form-display 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?

The schema has 100% description coverage for all four parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description itself does not add any parameter-level detail beyond what is in the schema; it only mentions 'prefill data' generically. Thus it neither elevates nor degrades the semantic clarity provided by 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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Displays a form to collect application prefill data required to continue an enquiry.' It uses a specific verb ('displays') and resource ('form'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like display_offer_form and display_upload_documents_form by specifying 'prequalification' and the workflow with submit_prequalification_details.

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 provides clear context: 'This tool only renders the form. When the user submits, the form calls submit_prequalification_details...' This tells the agent when to use this tool (to display the form) and hints at an alternative for submission. However, it does not explicitly state 'use this when X' or 'do not use this for Y', so it falls short of a 5.

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

All SecureLend Market tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clear, distinct purposes, but there are a few potentially confusing pairs. Compare_personal_banking and compare_savings_accounts overlap somewhat, and calculate_loan_payment could be mistaken for covering mortgages despite calculate_mortgage_payment existing. Overall, descriptions help resolve most ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

Tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern throughout: compare_* for comparisons, calculate_* for calculations, display_* for forms, submit_* for submissions, and get_* for offers. All names use lowercase with underscores, creating a predictable and uniform naming scheme.

Tool Count4/5

With 22 tools, the count is on the higher side but appropriate given the broad financial marketplace domain. Each tool covers a specific product category or workflow step, so the size feels justified rather than bloated. It is slightly heavy but not excessive for the scope.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers comparison, calculation, lead generation, prequalification, document upload, and status tracking, forming a comprehensive marketplace workflow. Minor gaps exist, such as no tools for updating or canceling applications, but these are workarounds and the core user journey is well supported.

Resources

Need Help?