SecureLend Market

submit_documents

Destructive

Generates a secure presigned URL for uploading a document to SecureLend's document storage, and records the document metadata against the application in SecureLend's database. Creates a persistent document record. Called by the document upload widget after the user selects a file. This creates a persistent document record and enables upload to SecureLend storage.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`fileName`	Yes	The original name of the file.
`documentType`	Yes	The category of the document.
`applicationId`	Yes	The ID of the application to associate the document with.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`message`	Yes
`success`	Yes
`uploadUrl`	No
`documentId`	No
`uploadFields`	No

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations: it reveals the tool generates a secure presigned URL and creates a persistent record, aligning with destructiveHint=true. It does not mention other side effects, but the core mutation is clearly disclosed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the main purpose but contains redundancy, repeating 'creates a persistent document record' and the upload-enabling concept. A tighter single or two-sentence version would be more effective.

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?

The description covers the tool's core behavior, usage trigger, and persistence aspect. Since an output schema exists, explaining return values is unnecessary. Minor redundancy does not harm completeness.

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?

All three parameters are fully documented in the schema with names, types, and descriptions (100% coverage). The description itself does not add parameter-level detail, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 identifies the tool's function: generating a secure presigned URL, recording metadata, and creating a persistent document record. It distinguishes from siblings like display_upload_documents_form by specifying the post-selection upload action.

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 explicitly states it is called by the document upload widget after the user selects a file, providing clear context. It does not name alternatives or exclusions, but the trigger condition is well-defined.

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?