enquiry_describeRead first. States plainly what submit_enquiry does on Accounting Firm Value: it starts an enquiry with human providers who quote directly. Nothing is bought, ordered or paid; no quote is guaranteed; it is free. Also returns who receives the details, the consent wording, and how the person confirms.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden and succeeds: it states nothing is bought, ordered, or paid, no quote is guaranteed, it is free, and it lists the returned information—recipients, consent wording, and confirmation method. This gives the agent a clear safety and side-effect profile.
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 short, front-loaded with 'Read first,' and each clause adds a distinct fact: what the tool explains, what it avoids, its cost, and what it returns. There is no redundant or filler wording.
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 parameterless informational tool with no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, what it does not do, and what its return value covers. Enough information is present for an agent to decide when to call it and what to expect.
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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There are no parameter details for the description to add, and no confusion is introduced.
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 states a specific purpose: 'States plainly what submit_enquiry does' and immediately differentiates it from a purchase, order, or guaranteed quote. The title reinforces that the result is an explanation of what the user gets, not the transaction itself, so the agent can distinguish enquiry_describe from submit_enquiry.
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 imperative 'Read first' tells the agent to consult this tool before engaging with submit_enquiry, and the description explicitly frames what this tool is not: a purchase, an order, a payment, or a guaranteed quote. It clearly signals that this tool provides pre-submission context rather than performing the submission.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
The three compare_* tools cleanly separate criteria, options, and the full table, while the enquiry_* tools distinguish describing the process, listing fields, and submitting. There is no meaningful functional overlap between any two tools.
compare_criteria, compare_options, and compare_table follow a consistent verb_noun pattern, and enquiry_describe and enquiry_fields share an enquiry_ prefix. submit_enquiry breaks that prefix pattern slightly, but the names remain clear and predictable overall.
Six tools cover two well-defined workflows without redundancy: comparison of report types and submission of an enquiry. Each tool has a distinct, necessary role.
The comparison tools provide the criteria schema, available options, and full value matrix, covering the comparison workflow end-to-end. The enquiry tools explain the process, provide the field schema, and support the two-step consent/confirmation submission, leaving no obvious dead ends.