enquiry_fieldsEvery field of the Broker vs Advisor enquiry: key, label, type, whether required, help text and the allowed options where there are any. Pass answers to submit_enquiry keyed by field key.
| 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 provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains what information the tool exposes and clarifies that actual submission happens through submit_enquiry, not this tool. It does not mention side effects or auth, but for a metadata/field-listing tool that gap is minor.
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?
Two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the content of the returned fields; the second gives actionable guidance for using them. Information is front-loaded and scannable.
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 introspection tool, the description is complete: it enumerates the output contents and connects them to the related submission tool. The absence of an output schema is compensated by the explicit field list in the description.
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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds useful semantic context about the output fields, even though it does not need to document input parameters.
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 identifies a specific resource: 'Every field of the Broker vs Advisor enquiry' and enumerates the field metadata (key, label, type, required, help text, allowed options). It lacks an explicit verb such as 'returns' or 'lists', but the meaning is unambiguous.
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?
It provides clear usage context by telling the agent how to use the output: 'Pass answers to submit_enquiry keyed by field key.' It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use this tool, but the integration guidance is strong enough for practical selection.
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 two prefixes (checker_ and enquiry_) cleanly separate the decision guide from the enquiry flow. Within each group, start/answer/tree and describe/fields/submit have distinct roles, and the descriptions make overlap unlikely.
All names are lowercase snake_case and grouped by prefix, which provides strong consistency. The post-prefix words mix nouns and verbs (start, tree, describe, submit_enquiry), so it is not a uniform verb_noun pattern.
Six tools is appropriate for this narrow scope: three for the decision guide lifecycle and three for the enquiry submission flow. No tool feels redundant or missing at a high level.
The tool set covers the complete user journey: learn about the guide, step through it or inspect the full tree, understand the enquiry, fetch its fields, and submit with consent/confirmation. No obvious dead-end or missing operation is apparent.