Skip to main content
Glama

site

by com.arizonaroofreplacementcost

Submit an ENQUIRY to human providers (two steps; not a purchase)

submit_enquiry

Submits an enquiry to Arizona Roof Replacement Cost — NOT a purchase, NOT a guaranteed quote. Step 1: call with the answers (keyed by field key from enquiry_fields) and consent=true; it validates and returns a summary, the consent line and a confirmation token — show the person the summary and the consent line. Step 2: only if the person agrees, call again with the same answers, consent=true and the confirmation token; the enquiry is then submitted, and the person receives an email with a link they must click before any provider sees it. Consent means the person has read and agreed to: "Happy for my details to go to licensed local roofing contractors, who'll quote me directly."

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
answersYesthe person's answers, keyed by field key
consentYestrue only when the person has agreed to: Happy for my details to go to licensed local roofing contractors, who'll quote me directly.
confirmationNothe confirmation token from step 1, after the person has approved the summary

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses the two-step workflow, validation behavior, confirmation token requirement, consent meaning, email delivery, and the click-before-provider-visible condition. This gives an agent a realistic model of side effects and sequencing.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is longer than average but every part serves a real purpose: the disclaimers, the exact consent text, and the sequential steps. It is front-loaded with the critical 'not a purchase' warning and then proceeds logically, though it could be slightly tightened with clearer step separation.

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 two-step stateful tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It explains the required sequence, what happens after submission, and the condition before providers see the enquiry. An agent has enough information to call the tool correctly on both steps.

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?

The input schema already documents all parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful process-level semantics: answers must be keyed by field key from enquiry_fields, consent requires the exact quoted agreement, and confirmation must be the token returned in step 1 after the person approves the summary.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it submits an enquiry to Arizona Roof Replacement Cost and clearly distinguishes the tool from purchase or quote actions. The title adds 'not a purchase' and the body names the exact target, making it easy to differentiate from the sibling describe/fields tools.

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 context for when to use the tool and sets expectations by emphasizing it is not a purchase or guaranteed quote. It also references enquiry_fields for keying answers, but it does not explicitly contrast this tool with its siblings or state when not to use it.

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

All site toolsInspect
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

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool covers a distinct concern: enquiry_describe explains the process, enquiry_fields provides the exact schema, and submit_enquiry performs the actual submission. There is no functional overlap between reading instructions, reading fields, and acting.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names are snake_case and clearly tied to 'enquiry', but the word order is mixed: enquiry_describe and enquiry_fields are noun-first, while submit_enquiry is verb-first. This is readable but not a consistent verb_noun pattern.

Tool Count5/5

Three tools is a well-scoped size for a single enquiry submission workflow. Each tool has a necessary role and none feel redundant.

Completeness5/5

The set covers the full required flow: understand the process, inspect the field schema, submit with consent and confirmation. No obvious dead-ends remain for the stated purpose of submitting an Arizona roof replacement enquiry.

Resources